Jeffrey Cohen v. Rod Rosenstein

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00263-WDQ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999609224]. Mailed to: Cohen. [15-6193]

Appeal: 15-6193

Doc: 16

Filed: 06/25/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6193

JEFFREY COHEN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
ROD ROSENSTEIN, US Attorney; HARRY GRUBER,
Attorney; JOYCE MCDONALD, Asst. US Attorney,

Asst.

US

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Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6193

Doc: 16

Filed: 06/25/2015

Pg: 2 of 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

remand for further proceedings in light of Wallace.

order

and

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