Jeffrey Cohen v. ROD ROSENSTEIN, US Attorney

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6193
JEFFREY COHEN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
ROD ROSENSTEIN, US Attorney; HARRY GRUBER, Asst. US
Attorney; JOYCE MCDONALD, Asst. US Attorney,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:15-cv-00263-WDQ)
Submitted: June 11, 2015 Decided: June 25, 2015
Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey Cohen, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey Brian Cohen appeals the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice,* under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A
(2012), his suit against federal prosecutors brought pursuant to
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of
Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
The district court determined that Cohen’s complaint raised
issues concerning the validity of the Government’s ongoing
criminal case against Cohen and, thus, should be dismissed under
the principles of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), and its
progeny. Because no final judgment of conviction has yet been
entered, we conclude that the district court’s dismissal under
Heck is premature. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 393-94
(2007).
Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s order and
remand for further proceedings in light of Wallace. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
* We have jurisdiction because Cohen cannot cure the defect
identified in his complaint by mere amendment. See Domino Sugar
Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67
(4th Cir. 1993).

-- 2 of 2 --