Phillips

MEMORANDUM **

Gary Phillips, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s *781 judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000) (dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A), and we affirm.

To the extent that Phillips challenges his conviction and sentence, the district court properly dismissed Phillip’s action because he has failed to demonstrate that his conviction and sentence have been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994).

The district court properly dismissed all claims against the state court judges on grounds of judicial immunity. See Olsen v. Idaho State Bd. of Medicine, 363 F.3d 916 , 922 (9th Cir.2004) (holding state court judges are absolutely immune from suits for damages for acts undertaken in judicial capacity).

The district court properly dismissed all claims against the county attorneys on grounds of prosecutorial immunity. See Milstein v. Cooley, 257 F.3d 1004, 1008 (9th Cir.2001) (holding prosecutors are absolutely immune from suits for damages for performing…