DANIEL F. BORDEN, Sr. v. R. Gautier;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Borden consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28**
U.S.C. § 636(c).
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision***
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DANIEL F. BORDEN, Sr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
R. GAUTIER; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-17822
D.C. No. 2:10-cv-02435-KJN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Kendall J. Newman, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
Submitted April 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Daniel F. Borden, Sr., appeals pro se from the
FILED
APR 27 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-17822 2
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging malicious
prosecution and other claims related to his conviction. We review de novo,
Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed without prejudice Borden’s action
because it appears from the face of the complaint that the action is Heck-barred.
See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 483-87 (1994) (applying “the hoary
principle that civil tort actions are not appropriate vehicles for challenging the
validity of outstanding criminal judgments . . . to § 1983 damages actions that
necessarily require the plaintiff to prove the unlawfulness of his conviction or
confinement”).
Borden’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
Borden’s request to waive copies is granted. All other pending motions and
requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --