Hawkins v. Akshar et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
CHRISTIAN JAVIER HAWKINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
FREDERICK J. AKSHAR II and
CRIS MOGENSON,
Defendants.
9:25-cv-083 (BKS/TWD)
Appearances:
Plaintiff pro se:
Christian Javier Hawkins
433681
Broome County Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 2047
Binghamton, NY 13902-2047
For Defendants:
Joshua T. Terrell
Broome County Attorney's Office
Broome County Office Building
60 Hawley Street
P.O. Box 1766
Binghamton, NY 13902-1766
Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, Chief United States District Judge:
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Christian Javier Hawkins brought this action pro se asserting claims under 42
U.S.C. § 1983 arising out of his detention at the Broome County Correctional Facility. (Dkt. No.
1). On February 27, 2026, the Court issued an order following its review of the complaint
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A. (Dkt. No. 9) The Court determined that the
following claims survived review: Plaintiff’s claim under the Religious Land Use and
Case 9:25-cv-00083-BKS-TWD Document 30 Filed 02/11/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA); (2) plaintiff's First Amendment free exercise claims;
and (3) plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims. (Id., at 16-17). On July 3,
2025, Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a). (Dkt. No. 24). After the Court granted two extension of time,
Plaintiff did not file a response. (Dkt. No. 26, 28). This matter was assigned to United States
Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks who, on January 20, 2026, issued a Report-
Recommendation, recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted. (Dkt. No. 29).
Magistrate Judge Dancks informed the parties that they had fourteen days within which to file
written objections to the report under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and that the failure to object to the
report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. (Id. at 13). No objections to the
Report-Recommendation have been filed.
As no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing
objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See
Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228–29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory
committee’s note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear
error and having found none, adopts the Report-Recommendation.
For these reasons, it is hereby
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dancks’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 29) is
ADOPTED; and it is further
ORDERED that that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim (Dkt. 24)
is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED; and it is further
Case 9:25-cv-00083-BKS-TWD Document 30 Filed 02/11/26 Page 2 of 3

3
ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment and close this case; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff in accordance with the
Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 11, 2026
Syracuse, New York
Case 9:25-cv-00083-BKS-TWD Document 30 Filed 02/11/26 Page 3 of 3