Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 20742 Su m m ar yC al endar L A D AV ID B . T AY L O R , Pl ai nt i f f

- Appe l l ant
v. R IC H A R D A . G U N N E L S , A ssistan t W a r d e n ; M A R K E T E M IL L E R , S erg ea n t; TH O M AS L. H U TT, Capt ai n; LI N CO LN E. C L A R K , D i s c i pl i nar y Capt ai n; DON AL D E. M UN I Z , M aj o r ; LAW RENCE DAW S ON, J R. , Ca p t a i n ; KRI S TE N L. GI BS ON, Ca s e M a n a g e rI I ; TRACYD . PUCKETT , S e r g e a n t ; NATHANI EL QUARTERMAN , DI RECT OR, T EXAS DEPART M EN T OF C RI M I NAL J U S T IC E , C O R R E C T IO N A L IN S T IT U T IO N S D IV IS IO N , D efen da n t s- A pp el l ees A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e S ou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 4: 09- C V
- 3068 B ef ore R E AV L E Y , JO L L Y , an d O W E N , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * L a D a v id B . T a y lo r , T e x a s p r is o n e r#9 3 8 6 9 7 , a p p e a ls th e d is t r ic tc o u r t ’s di sm i ssalof

hi s 42 U . S . C . § 198 3 act i on , w h i ch cha l l en ged a p ri son d i sci pl i n ary proceedi n g i n w h i ch h e l ostgood-t i m e credi t s, forfai l u re to st ate a cl ai m . T aylor United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D May 18, 2010 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk Case: 09-20742 Document: 00511114268 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2010N o. 09- 20742

2 ar gues t hat t he di st r i c tc our ter r ed byhol di ng t hathi s c l ai m s ar e b ar r ed by Heck v. Hu mph rey , 5 1 2 U . S . 4 7 7 (19 9 4 ). H e con ten d s th a t Heckdoe s notbar cha l l en ges t o pri son d i sci pl i n ary proceedi n gs. W e r e vi e w t he di s m i s s al o f a c o m pl ai nt pur s uant t o 28 U . S. C. § 1 91 5A de n o v o . S ee G eiger v. Jow ers , 404 F . 3d 371 , 373 ( 5th C i r. 200 5) . U n der Heck , 512 U . S . at 486
- 87, w h en a st ate pri soner w h ose convic t i on or sentence ha s not been de c l ar e d i nva l i d s e e ks da m ag e s i n a § 19 83 s ui t and a j udg m e nti n fav o ro f t he pl ai nt i f f w o ul d ne c e s s ar i l y i m pl y t he i nva l i di t y o f hi s c o nvi c t i o n o rs e nt e nc e , t he su it m u st b e d ism is s e d . F o r p u rp o se s o f Heck , t h e t erm “ convic t i on ” i n cl u des p r is o n d is c ip lin a r yd e c is io n s th a t r e s u lt in th e lo s s o f g o o d -tim e cr e d its . C lark e v. S t alder , 1 5 4 F .3d 1 8 6 , 1 8 9 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 8 ) ( e n b a n c). H ere, T a y lorasser t ed that hi s c on st i t u t i on alri gh t s had been vi ol ated bec ause t he disci pl i nary r ul e t hathe w as f ound gui l t y o f

vi ol at i ng w as u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y v a g u e a n d t h e r e wa s n o e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r tt h e c h a r g e . H e soug h tm on et ary da m ages an d to h ave the al l eged l y fal se di sci pl i n ary report e x p u n g e dfr o m h is re c o r d . If T a y lo r ’ s c la im s a r e cr e d ite d , th e yn e c e s s a r ilyim p ly t hatt he f

i ndi ng o f

g ui l ta nd t he pun i s hm e ntf o rt he v i o l at i o n wer e i nva l i d. Bec aus e he ha s no ts ho w n t hatt he di s c i pl i nar y de c i si on ha s b e e n o ve r t ur ne d, he c anno tm ai nt ai n a§ 1 98 3 ac t i o n f o rda m ag es or the expung e m e nto f t he d is c ip lin a r yre p o r t fr o m h is re c o r d . S ee E d w ard s v. B ali sok , 520 U . S. 641, 648 (1 9 9 7 ); Heck , 5 1 2 U .S . a t 4 8 6 -8 7 ; C lark e , 1 54 F. 3da t1 89 . Ac c o r di ngly, t he di st ri ctcourtdi d n oterri n di sm i ssi n g T aylor ’ s c om pl ai n tf or fai l u re to s t ate a c l a i m. T aylor ’ s app eali s w i t h ou targu able m eri ta n d i s f rivol ou s. SeeHow ard v . Ki ng , 7 0 7 F .2 d2 1 5 , 2 1 9 -2 0 (5 th C ir . 1 9 8 3 ). B e c a u s e t h e a p p e a l is f r iv o lo u s , it is d is m is s e d . S ee5 TH C IR . R . 42 . 2 . T h e d i sm i ssa lo f th i s a p p ea la s f rivo l ou s cou n ts a s a s t r ik e u n d e r§ 1 9 1 5 (g), a s d o e s th e d is t r i c tc o u r t ’s d is m is s a l o f T a y lo r ’s c o m p la in t. Se eAde

pegb a v . Ham m o ns , 1 0 3 F .3d 3 8 3 , 3 8 7 -8 8 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 6 ). T a y lo ris ca u tio n e dth a t, if h e a c c u m u la te s th r e e s tr ik e s u n d e r§ 1 9 1 5 (g), h e w ill Case: 09-20742 Document: 00511114268 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/18/2010N o. 09- 20742

3 n otbe perm i t t ed to proceed i n for m a pa u peri s i n a n y civi la ct i on or ap pea lf i l ed w hi l e he i s i nc ar c e r at e d o rde t ai ne d i n a ny fac i l i t y unl e s s he i s und e ri m m i ne nt d a n g e ro f s e r io u s p h y s ic a l inju r y . S ee§ 1 9 1 5 (g). AP P EA L DI S M I S S ED ; S ANC T I ON WARNI NG I S S UED . Case: 09-20742 Document: 00511114268 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/18/2010