Erath

California ex rel. Bybee v. Erath

Good Law
83 F. App'x 971
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 19, 2003No. 03-55609; D.C. No. CV-02-04242-DDPCalifornia375 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gayle Bybee, Carla Figaro, Nora Moore, Teresa Giordano, and Denise Ricca-White appeal pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing their Bivens action alleging that prosecutors and Internal Revenue *972 Service (“IRS”) agents violated their Constitutional rights by preparing and serving fraudulent grand jury subpoenas. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the dismissal of a Bivens action for failure to state a claim. See Libas Ltd. v. Carillo, 329 F.3d 1128, 1130 (9th Cir.2003). We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of a motion for reconsideration. See Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Ensley, 174 F.3d 977, 987 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), the claims brought by Bybee, Moore, and Giordano because a favorable outcome would undermine the criminal charges pending against them. See Harvey v. Waldron, 210 F.3d 1008, 1014 (9th Cir.2000) {“Heck applies to pending criminal charges, and [ ] a claim, that if successful would necessarily imply the invalidity of a conviction in a pending criminal…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.