IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

CARL RUSSELL, CHRIS THOMPSON, § as Next Friend of C.R. & J.R., Minors, § ARACELY GARCIA, as Next Friend of § § D.R., a Minor, §

§ Plaintiffs, § CASE NO. 1:24-CV-00695-ADA § v. § § NEW PUNCH BOWL AUSTIN § DOMAIN, LLC, D/B/A PUNCH BOWL § SOCIAL, NEW PBS BRAND CO., LLC, § BEN PETKO, US BOWLING § CORPORATION, UL SOLUTIONS § INC., MURREY INTERNATIONAL, § INC., & AHLBORN KEGEL— UND § BOWLINGBAHNENBAU GMBH § F/K/A AHLBORN KEBO § § Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Mark Lane (Dkt. 63) regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (Dkt. 33), Defendant New PBS Brand Co. LLC’s Amended Motion to Dismiss Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Dkt. 39), and all related briefing. The report and recommendation was filed on January 10, 2025. Judge Lane recommended that the District Court DENY Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (Dkt. 33), DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs’ claims against Ben Petko, GRANT Defendant New PBS Brand Co. LLC’s Amended Motion to Dismiss Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Dkt. 39) and DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs’ claims against New PBS Brand Co. LLC. This Court hereby adopts Judge Lane’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. Wainwright,

, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996)). Plaintiffs filed objections on January 24, 2025 (Dkt. 65). 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 Lane (Dkt. 63) is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ objections are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (Dkt. 33) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ claims against Ben Petko are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant New PBS Brand Co. LLC’s Amended Motion to Dismiss Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Dkt. 39) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ claims against New PBS Brand Co. LLC are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SIGNED this 16" day of October, 2025.

ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG