
    Acharmu Yazaid CROSBY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Jeanne S. WOODFORD, Director California Department of Corrections; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 06-15734.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 9, 2007 .
    Filed July 16, 2007.
    Acharmu Yazaid Crosby, Blythe, CA, pro se.
    Constance L. Picciano, Esq., Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Acharmu Yazaid Crosby appeals pro se the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging the constitutionality of California’s statutorily mandated period of parole following determinate prison sentences. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the dismissal de novo, see Butterfield, v. Bail, 120 F.3d 1023, 1024 (9th Cir.1997), and we affirm.

Although Crosby seeks to cast his action as a general challenge to the constitutionality of California’s parole statutes, “success in [his] action would necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of [his] confinement.” Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81-82, 125 S.Ct. 1242, 161 L.Ed.2d 253 (2005). Crosby’s action is therefore barred, id. at 81-82, 125 S.Ct. 1242, and Crosby’s sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500, 93 S.Ct. 1827, 36 L.Ed.2d 439 (1973).

AFFIRMED. 
      
      This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     