MEMORANDUM Andre Brigham Young, a former Washington state prisoner and current civil detainee, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.
The district court properly dismissed the action as Heck-barred because a judgment in Young’s favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction, and Young failed to allege that his conviction has been invalidated. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364; Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1139-40 (9th Cir.2005) (applying Heck to civil detainees). However, we vacate the judgment to the extent that it dismissed the action with prejudice, and remand for entry of dismissal without prejudice. See Trimble v.
City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 585 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam) (stating that dismissals under Heck are without prejudice). We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir.1999). The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal. AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.