MILAN D. SMITH, JR. and JOHN B. OWENS, Circuit Judges, and
ANDREW S. OLDHAM, District Judge.*

MILAN D. SMITH, JR., Circuit Judge:

Philip Roy Galanti was incarcerated in the Nevada Department of
Corrections. As he neared the end of his prison term, he completed tasks—
obtaining a high school diploma and two vocational certificates—and
alleged that he was improperly denied time-credits that would have
shortened the maximum term of his imprisonment. Galanti filed suit under
42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional
rights by denying him the time-credits. The district court dismissed his
complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Galanti appealed.

We reverse the district court's judgment and remand the case for
further proceedings.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

Galanti was incarcerated in the Nevada Department of Corrections
(NDOC) from 1995 to 2019. Galanti Decl. ¶ 2. During his incarceration,
Galanti completed a high school diploma and two vocational certificates.
Id. ¶ 3. According to Galanti, Nevada law entitled him to time-credits for
completing these educational achievements. Id. ¶ 4. Galanti alleged that
the NDOC improperly denied him these time-credits. Id. ¶ 5.

Galanti was released from prison in 2019. Id. ¶ 6. After his release,
Galanti filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States
District Court for the District of Nevada. Galanti Decl. ¶ 7. In his
complaint, Galanti alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional
rights by denying him the time-credits. Id. ¶ 8.

The defendants moved to dismiss Galanti's complaint. Defendants'
Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 8. The district court granted the motion to
dismiss. The district court's order did not address the defendants'
alternative argument based on Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994).

On appeal, the defendants asserted Heck as an alternative ground for
affirming the judgment. Defendants' Brief, ECF No. 30. The Ninth Circuit
reversed the district court's judgment, rejecting the defendants' Heck
argument.

Question not identified.

Whether the Heck v. Humphrey bar to § 1983 actions applies when a plaintiff seeks damages for the denial of sentence-reduction credits but can no longer pursue habeas corpus relief because he has been released from custody