Hawkins v. Williams et al

1
25-cv-03183-AJB-BLM
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CHRISTOPHER HAWKINS,
CDCR #CC-0532,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DERRICK WILLIAMS, SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, SAN
DIEGO COUNTY JAIL and
DOES 1-10,
Defendants.
Case No.: 25-cv-03183-AJB-BLM
ORDER:
(1) VACATING JUDGMENT AND
REOPENING CASE;
(2) GRANTING MOTION TO FILE
AN AMENDED COMPLAINT; and
(3) EXTENDING TO TIME TO FILE
AMENDED COMPLAINT
On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff Christopher Hawkins, an inmate at the San Diego
Central Jail at the time of the events, proceeding pro se, filed this civil action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 along with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). (Doc. Nos.
1–2.) On December 18, 2025, the Court granted IFP and dismissed the Complaint without
prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim.
(Doc. No. 3.) Plaintiff was notified of the deficiencies of his pleading and granted leave to
amend on or before February 2, 2026. (Id. at 9.) Plaintiff was informed that if he failed to
timely amend, the Court would dismiss this action for failure to state a claim and failure to
Case 3:25-cv-03183-AJB-JAC Document 7 Filed 03/18/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
25-cv-03183-AJB-BLM
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
prosecute. (Id. (quoting Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“If a plaintiff
does not take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert
the dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”)).)
On March 16, 2026, having not heard from Plaintiff or received an amended
complaint, the Court dismissed this action without prejudice for failure to state a 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. (Doc. Nos. 4–5.) That same day, the Court
received Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint requesting an extension
of time to amend due to interruptions in his process of amending. (Doc. No. 6.) Plaintiff’s
motion is dated March 9, 2026, and was mailed from the prison on March 10, 2026, prior
to entry of judgment. (Id. at 2-3.) The motion was therefore constructively filed prior to
entry of final judgment, although still beyond the time set to amend. See Houston v. Lack,
487 U.S. 266, 270–72 (1988) (a pleading is constructively filed when a prisoner delivers it
to the prison authorities for forwarding to the court).
Good cause shown, the Court VACATES its March 16, 2026, judgment and
ORDERS the case to be reopened. Plaintiff’s Motion to file an amended complaint is
GRANTED and the Court EXTENDS the time to file an amended complaint to on or
before April 20, 2026.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 18, 2026
Case 3:25-cv-03183-AJB-JAC Document 7 Filed 03/18/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2