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

§ BRIGHT DATA LTD., § Plaintiff, § § v. § § TESO LT, UAB d/b/a OXYLABS, § CASE NO. 6:23-CV-00055-ADA-DTG UAB, § § Defendant. § §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Derek Gilliland (Dkt. 40) regarding Defendant Oxylabs’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 36). The report and recommendation was filed on March 3, 2025. Judge Gilliland recommended that the District Court DENY the Motion to Dismiss. This Court hereby adopts Judge Gilliland’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 March 17, 2025 (Dkt. 41). 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 Gilliland (Dkt. 40) is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ objections are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 36) is DENIED.

SIGNED this 10" day of November, 2025.

CBrar eo. ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG