Ervin Charles St. Amand, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Ron Angelone, Director, Ndpo; Karl L. Sannicks, Asst. Dir.,ndpo; George Deeds, Former Warden, Sdcc; Sherman Hatcher,warden, Sdcc; Gary True, Awo; Tom Smith, Ccws; Ruthriley, Ccws; Merline Willick; Robin L. Bates, Ccrm,defendants-appellees, 142 F.3d 445 (9th Cir. 1998)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Ervin Charles St. Amand, a former Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for defendant prison officials in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. St. Amand alleges that defendants violated his constitutional rights by incorrectly calculating his work and education credits so that he was released from prison on September 30, 1993, rather than on April 14, 1993. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, see Jesinger v. Nevada Fed. Credit Union, 24 F.3d 1127, 1130 (9th Cir. 1994), and we vacate and remand.

Because the allegations made in St. Amand's section 1983 complaint challenge the validity of his sentence, his section 1983 action is not cognizable. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S. Ct. 2364, 129 L. Ed. 2d 383 (1994); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500, 93 S. Ct. 1827, 36 L. Ed. 2d 439 (1973). Further, because St. Amand's action is not cognizable, the district court should have dismissed St. Amand's action without prejudice. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 585 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). Accordingly, we vacate the district court's judgment and remand for the district court to enter judgment dismissing St. Amand's section 1983 action without prejudice.

VACATED and REMANDED.¹