Christopher Hawkins v. Derrick Williams, San Diego County, San Diego County Sheriff’s Department, San Diego County Jail and Does 1-10
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Malcolm F. Marsh (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a pro se prisoner's civil rights complaint that had been previously dismissed without prejudice with leave to amend, noting that the plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint by the deadline. The court ordered the action dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Dismissal of the action without prejudice for failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute“Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice for failure to state claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) & 1915A(b)(1), and for failure to prosecute.” | agree with court The court previously granted leave to amend with a specific deadline and warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the entire action. The plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or contact the court. Dismissing the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute is a standard and appropriate exercise of the court's inherent authority to manage its docket and enforce deadlines, particularly in pro se prisoner litigation where the court has already provided notice and an opportunity to cure. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the prior dismissal with leave to amend, the expiration of the amendment period, and the plaintiff's inaction. It relies on the correct statutory provisions for prisoner litigation and cites binding Ninth Circuit precedent (Lira v. Herrera) to support the conversion of the dismissal into a dismissal of the entire action for failure to prosecute. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for a procedural dismissal based on inaction after notice.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER HAWKINS, Case No.: 25-cv-03183-AJB-BLM CDCR #CC-0532, 12 ORDER DISMISSING FOR Plaintiff, 13 FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM vs. AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 14 15 DERRICK WILLIAMS, SAN DIEGO 16 COUNTY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, SAN 17 DIEGO COUNTY JAIL and 18 DOES 1-10, 19 Defendants. 20 21 On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff Christopher Hawkins, an inmate at the San Diego 22 Central Jail at the time of the events, proceeding pro se, filed this civil action pursuant to 23 42 U.S.C. § 1983 along with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). (Doc. Nos. 24 1–2.) On December 18, 2025, the Court granted IFP and dismissed the Complaint without 25 prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim. 26 (Doc. No. 3.) Plaintiff was notified of the deficiencies of his pleading and granted leave to 27 amend on or before February 2, 2026. (Id. at 9.) Plaintiff was informed that if he failed to 28 timely amend, the Court would dismiss this action for failure to state a claim and failure to 1 || prosecute. (/d. (quoting Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“Ifa plaintiff 2 || does not take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert 3 || the dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”)).) To date, Plaintiff has 4 ||not filed an amended complaint or otherwise contacted the Court. 5 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice for failure to state 6 claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)fii) & 7 || 1915A(b)(1), and for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court must enter final judgment 8 || accordingly and close the file. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 || Dated: March 16, 2026 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2