Zachary Joseph Hawthorn
How Judge Hawthorn rules, drawn from 33 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Hawthorn
Zack Hawthorn is a United States Magistrate Judge in the Beaumont Division of the Eastern District of Texas. He joined the bench in August 2011 after practicing law in Texas.
Judge Hawthorn's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Hawthorn, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Conferences
Telephone appearances are generally prohibited; travel alone is not an exigent reason for an exception.
“Appearances by telephone for hearings are generally prohibited, but if you believe exigent circumstances exist, feel free to call the chambers administrator. Travel to court is generally not an exigent circumstance”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge Hawthorn decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Green v. Tri-Con, Hawthorn recommended summary judgment for the employer after finding the plaintiff had not identified a comparator with a comparable disciplinary record; the district judge adopted the recommendation.
“a proper comparator must have a comparable number of disciplinary violations or infractions”
Procedural preferences
In Nettles v. Warden, Hawthorn recommended granting the respondent summary judgment on a section 2241 petition because the prisoner had not exhausted administrative remedies; the district judge adopted that recommendation.
“summary judgment should be granted because petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies”
Cautions
In Green v. Tri-Con, Inc., Magistrate Judge Hawthorn recommended summary judgment for the employer; the district judge adopted his report after de novo review of the plaintiff’s objections.
“The Court has conducted a de novo review of Judge Hawthorn's Report and Recommendation and has carefully considered Green's objections. The Court finds that Judge Hawthorn's findings and conclusions of law are correct and that Green's objections are without merit.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Judge Hawthorn's Report and Recommendation Granting Defendant Tri-Con. Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 65] is ADOPTED. Accordingly, Plaintiff Bruce Green's claims against Tri-Con are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“The magistrate judge recommends granting respondent's motion for summary judgment and dismissing the petition without prejudice. ... the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (#13) is ADOPTED. Respondent's motion for summary judgment (#9) is GRANTED.”
“The Magistrate Judge recommends the motion be granted and the petition dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. ... the report of the magistrate judge (#6) is ADOPTED. The motion for summary judgment (#5) is GRANTED.”
“The defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment. The magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation ... recommending the motion be granted. ... the report of the magistrate judge (#22) is ADOPTED. The motion for summary judgment (#20) is GRANTED.”
“The magistrate judge recommends granting Respondent's motion for summary judgment and denying the petition. ... the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge [Dkt. 9] is ADOPTED. Respondent's motion for summary judgment [Dkt. 8] is GRANTED.”
“the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation in which he recommended denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. ... the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (#18) is ADOPTED. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (#15) is DENIED.”
“The magistrate judge recommends the respondent's motion to dismiss be granted. ... the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED.”
“the petitioner has failed to make a sufficient showing to merit the issuance of a certificate of appealability. Therefore, a certificate of appealability shall not be issued.”
“The Magistrate Judge recommends defendants' 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss be denied. ... petitioner's objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED.”
“Judge Hawthorn issued his Report and Recommendation on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Prosecutorial Misconduct and recommended that the court deny the motion. ... the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Prosecutorial Misconduct (Doc. No. 91) is DENIED.”
“the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. A Final Judgment will be entered separately, remanding this action to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.”
A pro se plaintiff sued the United States and numerous cabinet officials. Hawthorn's R&R granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and recommended sua sponte dismissal for lack of standing. District Judge Truncale overruled the plaintiff's objections and adopted the R&R. Grounding quote: 'a Report and Recommendation [Dkt. 6], which granted pro se Plaintiff David R. Pete's ('Pete') Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis [Dkt. 2], and recommended dismissal of this case for lack of standing. ... Judge Hawthorn's Report and Recommendation [Dkt. 6] is ADOPTED and that Pete's Objection [Dkt. 7] is OVERRULED.'
In a pro se prisoner civil-rights suit, Hawthorn's R&R recommended sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim during in forma pauperis screening. District Judge Heartfield adopted the recommendation without objections. Grounding quote: 'The Magistrate Judge recommends that the lawsuit be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. ... the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.'
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- His assigned / consent docket of record is dominated by Social Security disability appeals (the largest single category), alongside a range of civil cases handled by consent under 28 U.S.C. 636(c), first-party insurance, mortgage, commercial-contract, product-liability, Federal Tort Claims Act, construction, and prisoner civil-rights matters, plus the Beaumont Division's criminal-duty work (magistrate criminal and grand-jury matters) not reflected in the civil duration cohort.
- Filed-to-terminated durations on the 11-case terminated civil cohort (filed 2023-2024) ran 154-653 days (median 328); the Social Security subset (N=7) ran shorter (median 198 days), while contested civil matters ran longer (e.g. the Gilbert v. Liberty County 1983 case, 653 days).
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, not for Judge Hawthorn: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 2,854 | 7.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,222 | 5.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,581 | 9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 15 | 26 months |
| Closed during trial | 36 | 24.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,854 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,345 | 7.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,003 | 8.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,968 | 8.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,122 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,956 | 8.9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,972 | 8.6 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Hawthorn with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hawthorn, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hawthorn's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace