IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION § SKYLAR HORTON, INDIVIDUALLY § AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF TRISTAN § CASE NO. 1:24-CV-00221-ADA-DH TURNER; AND TYLER TURNER, § INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT § FRIEND OF TRISTAN TURNER; § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § WANABANA AUSTROFOOD CIT. § LTDA, ET AL., § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Dustin Howell [Dkt. 118] regarding Defendant Austrofood S.A.S.’s (“Austrofood”) motion to dismiss [Dkt. 86], Defendant Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.’s (“Dollar Tree”) motion to dismiss [Dkt. 87], and Plaintiffs Skylar Horton and Tyler Turner, individually and as next of friend to Tristan Turner’s (“Plaintiffs”) motion for default judgment [Dkt. 98], and all related briefing. The report and recommendation was filed on April 8, 2025. Judge Howell recommended that the District Court GRANT Austrofood’s motion to dismiss [Dkt. 86], GRANT-IN-PART and DENY-IN-PART Dollar Tree’s motion to dismiss [Dkt. 87], and GRANT Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment [Dkt. 98]. This Court hereby adopts Judge Howell’s Recommendations. A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation, thereby securing de novo review by the district court.

(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). A district court need not consider “[f]rivolous, conclusive, or general objections.” Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n,

(5th Cir. 1987) (quoting Nettles v. Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996)). Defendant Dollar Tree filed objections on April 22, 2025 [Dkt. 121]. The Court has conducted de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, the objections to the report and recommendation, and the applicable laws. After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations should be adopted.

Plaintiffs filed objections on April 22, 2025 [Dkt. 122]. The Court has conducted de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, the objections to the report and recommendation, and the applicable laws. After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations should be adopted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Hightower [Dkt. 118] is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Dollar Tree’s objections are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ objections are OVERRULED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Austrofood’s motion to dismiss [Dkt. 86] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Dollar Tree’s motion to dismiss [Dkt. 87] is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. Specifically, Dollar Tree’s motion to dismiss is granted with regard to Plaintiffs’ negligence, gross negligence, fraud, and fraudulent concealment claims, and otherwise denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment [Dkt. 98] is GRANTED, and a declaratory judgment as to WanaBana USA’s liability will be entered. SIGNED this 16" day of October, 2025.

(Dror ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG