Case Name: Theron N. LYNCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALAMEDA COUNTY; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-06
Citations: 398 F. App'x 295
Docket Number: No. 09-15192
Parties: Theron N. LYNCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALAMEDA COUNTY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 398
Pages: 295–296

Head Matter:
Theron N. LYNCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALAMEDA COUNTY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-15192.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.
Filed Oct. 6, 2010.
Theron N. Lynch, Avenal, CA, pro se.
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Theron N. Lynch, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the abstract of judgment for his sentence is incorrect and requires him to serve his full sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action as Hee/c-barred because a judgment in Lynch's favor "would necessarily imply the invalidity of his . sentence," and Lynch has not demonstrated that his sentence has already been invalidated. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.