IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

) JASON MICHAEL WOODALL, ) ) 2:23-cv-1370-RJC-KT Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) District Judge Robert J. Colville ) MONROEVILLE POLICE, et al.,, ) Magistrate Judge Kezia O. L. Taylor ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER OF COURT Currently pending before the Court is the April 20, 2025 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 137) filed by the Honorable Kezia O. L. Taylor in the above-captioned matter. Judge Taylor’s Report and Recommendation addresses a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 123) filed by Defendant Christina Ferraro (“Ferraro”) and a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 124) filed by Defendants Officer Steven Maritz, Officer Pierre DeFelice, and Lieutenant Safar (the “Monroeville Defendants”) in this matter. Ferraro and the Monroeville Defendants are the lone remaining Defendants in this case following previous motion practice, and each seeks dismissal of the claims asserted against them in the Third Amended Complaint (ECF No. 120) filed by Plaintiff Jason Michael Woodall. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the pending Motions to Dismiss be granted, and that the claims set forth in Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Objections to Judge Taylor’s Report and Recommendation were due by May 7, 2025. On May 9, 2025, Plaintiff’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation, which he dated May 1, 2025, were received and docketed by the Clerk’s Office. In light of Plaintiff’s incarcerated status and the prison mailbox rule, the Court deems the Objections timely. Objections to a magistrate judge’s disposition of a dispositive matter are subject to de novo review before the district judge.

(b)(1)(B)-(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The

reviewing district court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to which objections are made.

Following de novo review, “[t]he district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has explained that, “even absent objections to the report and recommendation, a district court should ‘afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report,’” and has “described this level of review as ‘reasoned consideration.’” Equal Employment Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch,

(3d Cir. 2017) (quoting Henderson v. Carlson,

, 878 (3d Cir. 1987)). Upon consideration of Judge Taylor’s Report and Recommendation, the Objections filed

by Plaintiff, and upon de novo review of all relevant docket entries, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: The Court agrees with the thorough and well-reasoned analysis and conclusions set forth in Judge Taylor’s Report and Recommendation, and the Court accepts and adopts Judge Taylor’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety as the opinion of the Court with respect to the Motions to Dismiss filed at ECF Nos. 123 and 124. Plaintiff’s objections to the Report and Recommendation are overruled. They fail to raise any issue not already addressed by Judge Taylor, and merely assert disappointment and disagreement with her analysis and conclusions. As the Court has stated, it agrees with Judge Taylor as to the issue of whether dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims is warranted. The Court notes that there is no basis whatsoever to support Plaintiff’s assertions of bias or prejudice on Judge Taylor’s part, and any objection raising the same is overruled as patently frivolous and meritless. The Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 123) filed by Defendant Christina Ferraro (“Ferraro”)

and the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 124) filed by Defendants Officer Steven Maritz, Officer Pierre DeFelice, and Lieutenant Safar will be granted, and the claims set forth in Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint will be dismissed with prejudice, as amendment would be futile. The Court will separately enter an Order granting the Motions to Dismiss and a Rule 58 judgment order. The Clerk of Court will be directed to mark this case as closed.

BY THE COURT:

/s/Robert J. Colville Robert J. Colville United States District Judge DATED: August 25, 2025

cc: All counsel of record

Jason Michael Woodall QQ5251 SCI COAL TOWNSHIP 1 Kelley Drive Coal Township, PA 17866