□ Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT December 05, 202¢ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk HOUSTON DIVISION

HIL-TECH, LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:22-CV-02310 § SHREE MAHALAXMI INDUSTRIES, et 8 al., § § Defendants. § ORDER Before the Court are United States Magistrate Judge Yvonne Y. Ho’s Memorandum and Recommendation filed on October 27, 2023 (Doc. #95), Plaintiff Hil-Tech, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”) Objections (Doc. #96), and Defendant Seaboard Food Services, Inc.’s (“Seaboard”) Response (Doc. #97). The Magistrate Judge’s findings and conclusions are reviewed de novo. FED. R. □□□□ P, 72(b);

(b)(1); United States v. Wilson,

(Sth Cir. 1989). Having reviewed the parties’ arguments and applicable legal authority, the Court adopts the Memorandum and Recommendation as its Order. The Court finds that the indemnity provision at issue does not comply with the express negligence rule, and even assuming that actual notice or knowledge can override express negligence requirements, Plaintiff's allegations do not show that Seaboard had the requisite knowledge. In addition, the Court finds that amendment would be futile. Therefore, Seaboard’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. #85) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Seaboard’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #89) and Motion

for Leave to file Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #90) are DENIED. Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Shree Mahalaxmi Industries remain pending. It is so ORDERED. DEC 0 4 2023 Date The Honorable Alfred H. Bennett United States District Judge