Opinion issued August 2, 2012

In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas

NO. 01B12B00153BCV

MONTA C. FIZER, Appellant V. JENNIFER FIZER, Appellee

On Appeal from the 280th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011-76531

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Monta C. Fizer, has neither paid the required filing fee for this appeal nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (“A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay—at the time an item is presented for filing—whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court order.”), 20.1 (listing requirements for establishing indigence); see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 51.207 (Vernon Supp. 2011), § 51.941(a) (Vernon 2005), § 101.041 (Vernon Supp. 2011) (listing fees in court of appeals); Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 07-9138 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2007), reprinted in TEX. R. APP. P. app. A § B(1) (listing fees in court of appeals). Appellant was notified on February 15, 2012 that this appeal was subject to dismissal if he did not pay the fee by February 27, 2012. After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (allowing enforcement of rule); 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case). Appellant was again notified on June 8, 2012 that this appeal was subject to dismissal if he did not pay the fee by June 18, 2012. After being notified again that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond. See id. Appellant has also neither established indigence, nor paid, or made arrangements to pay, the fee for preparing the clerk=s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1 (listing requirements for establishing indigence), 37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of

appeal for want of prosecution if no clerk’s record filed due to appellant’s fault).

After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal for want of prosecution).

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. We dismiss all pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Bland, Massengale, and Brown.