IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WELLBORE FISHING & RENTAL § TOOLS, LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-23-CV-857-FB § D&L MANUFACTURING, INC. d/b/a § D&L OIL TOOLS, § § Defendant. § ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the Court are the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed on August 22, 2024 (sealed Report at docket #48; partially redacted Report at docket #53) and Defendant’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed on September 19, 2025 (partially redacted Objections at docket #54; sealed Objections at docket #55). Where no party has objected to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of them. See

(b)(1) ("A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). In such cases, the Court need only review the Report and Recommendation and determine whether they are either clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson,

(5th Cir.), cert. denied,

(1989). On the other hand, any Report or Recommendation to which there are objections requires de novo review by the Court. Such a review means that the Court will examine the entire record, and will make an independent assessment of the law. The Court need not, however, conduct a de novo review when the objections are frivolous, conclusive, or general in nature. Battle v. United States Parole In the Report, United States Magistrate Judge Farrer recommends to this Court that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (sealed motion at docket #37; redacted motion at docket #47) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court has reviewed the Defendant’s objections and has conducted a de novo review of those findings, conclusions or recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendation identified by the Defendant in its objections and the basis for those objections, but did not consider objections, if any, that were frivolous, conclusive or general objections or matters raised for the first time. The Court finds, after careful consideration of the record and the Report and Recommendation, that the Defendant’s objections, at this time, lack merit and are overruled. Therefore, the Court hereby accepts, approves, and adopts the Magistrate Judge's factual findings and legal conclusions contained in the Report and Recommendation (sealed Report at docket #48; partially redacted Report at docket #53) and finds the recommendation shall be accepted such that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (sealed motion at docket #37; redacted motion at docket #47) shall be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge filed in this case on August 22, 2024 (sealed Report at docket #48; partially redacted Report at docket #53) is ACCEPTED such that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (sealed motion at docket #37; redacted motion at docket #47) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is so ORDERED. SIGNED this 29th day of September, 2025.

jeer C a FRED BJERY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-