NUMBER 13-05-481-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

PAUL EUGENE MONTIQUE,                                        Appellant,

                                           v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION AND

DAVID DIAZ,                                                          Appellees.

_______________________________________________________

                  On appeal from the 156th District Court

                              of Bee County, Texas.

_______________________________________________________ 

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Garza

                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, PAUL EUGENE MONTIQUE, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 156th District Court of Bee County, Texas, in cause number B-05-1075-CV-B.  The clerk=s record was filed on September 13, 2005.  The reporter=s record was filed on August 17, 2005.  Appellant=s brief was due on October 13, 2005.  To date, no appellate brief has been received.

When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant=s failure to timely file a brief.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).

On October 31, 2005, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).  Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief.  To date, no response has been received.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to file a proper appellate brief, 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 26^th day of January, 2006