Van Patrick Macon and Freddick E. Macon v. Philadelphia MS Police Department,...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION VAN PATRICK MACON AND FREDDICK E. MACON PLAINTIFFS V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:24-CV-807-DPJ-ASH PHILADELPHIA MS POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL. DEFENDANTS ORDER On October 29, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Andrew S. Harris held an omnibus hearing. Following that hearing, he entered a Report and Recommendation [58] recommending that Plaintiffs’ claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Ronda Johnson be dismissed for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). R&R [58] at 2–3. Judge Harris, having considered Plaintiffs’ testimony and filings, found there was no allegation that Johnson, a private citizen, had acted pursuant to an agreement with state actors. Id. at 3; see id. (“Absent a plausible allegation of an agreement, Johnson cannot be liable under § 1983.”). Plaintiffs did not file an objection, and the time to do so has passed. Id. (advising Plaintiffs they had 14 days to object).

“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (1983), quoted in Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) as noted in Alexander v. Verizon Wireless Servs., L.L.C., 875 F.3d 243, 248 (5th Cir. 2017). Having reviewed the record and found no clear error, the Court accepts Judge Harris’s well-reasoned recommendation.

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [58] of United States Magistrate Judge Andrew S. Harris is adopted as the finding and holding of this Court. Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims against Ronda Johnson are dismissed; she is terminated as a Defendant.

SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 2nd day of December, 2025.

s/ Daniel P. Jordan III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE