NUMBER 13-05-518-CV

                                 COURT OF APPEALS

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JOHN H. WILSHUSEN,                                                                     Appellant,

                                                             v.

ROWLAND FIBERGLASS, INC., ET AL.,                                        Appellees.

____________________________________________________________

                             On appeal from the 156th District Court

                                    of San Patricio County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

                               MEMORANDUM OPINION

                      Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

                                 Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, JOHN H. WILSHUSEN, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 156th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas, in cause number S-05-5428CV-B.  No clerk=s record has been filed due to appellant=s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk=s fee for preparing the clerk=s record. 

If the trial court clerk fails to file the clerk=s record because the appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk=s fee for preparing the clerk=s record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs.  Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

On September 7, 2005, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).  Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed.  To date, no response has been received from appellant.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk=s fee for preparing the clerk=s record,  this Court=s notice, and appellant=s failure to respond, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 1st day of December, 2005.