UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT November 19, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

SIDNEY MAURICE THOMPSON, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00263 § FACEBOOK META, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS CASE

On October 15, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby issued his “Memorandum and Recommendation to Dismiss Case” (D.E. 8), recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or, alternatively, that it be dismissed with prejudice as frivolous. The Magistrate Judge also recommends that this action count as a strike for purposes of

(g). Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);

(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed. When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc.,

(5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996)). Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 8), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous. The Court ORDERS that this dismissal counts as a “strike” for purposes of

(g), and INSTRUCTS the Clerk of Court to send notice of this dismissal to the Manager of the Three Strikes List for the Southern District of Texas at Three_Strikes @txs.uscourts.gov. ORDERED on November 19, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2