Nncc

MEMORANDUM

Nevada state prisoner Michael John Moe appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action -alleging constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm.

Dismissal of Moe’s action as Heck- barred was proper because Moe has not demonstrated that the results of the disciplinary hearing, including the loss of good-time credits, have been invalidated. See Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648 , 117 S.Ct 1584 , 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997) (claim for monetary and declaratory relief based on allegations that necessarily imply the invalidity of the loss of good-time credits is not cognizable under § 1983); Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994) (if “a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence ... the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the…