COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER ON MOTION Cause number: 01-13-00199-CV Style: Paccar, Inc., Cleveland Mack Sales, Inc. d/b/a Performance Kenworth, and Caterpillar, Inc. v. Ho Ho Ho Express, Inc. Date motion filed*: July 26, 2013 Type of motion: Unopposed motion for extension of time to file appellee’s brief Party filing motion: Appellee Document to be filed: Appellee’s brief Is appeal accelerated? No If motion to extend time: Original due date: N/A Number of previous extensions granted: 0 Current Due date: N/A Date Requested: August 30, 2013 Ordered that motion is:  Granted If document is to be filed, document due:  The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time absent extraordinary circumstances  Denied  Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot) with instructions.  Other: _____________________________________ Appellee’s brief is due 30 days after the final appellant’s brief is filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(b).

Although Cleveland Mack Sales, Inc. and Caterpillar, Inc. have filed briefs, Paccar, Inc. has not yet filed a brief in this appeal. Accordingly, appellee’s brief is not yet due and the motion is dismissed as moot. If Paccar, Inc., moves to dismiss its appeal pursuant to settlement, rather than filing a brief, then the parties shall promptly inform the court. Appellee’s brief will be due 30 days from the date that Paccar, Inc. either files its brief or moves to dismiss its appeal.

Judge's signature: /s/ Jane Bland  Panel consists of ____________________________________________ Date: August 2, 2013

November 7, 2008 Revision