COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER Appellate case name: Don K. Avni a/k/a Don Avni Kaminetzky v. David A. Newman Appellate case number: 01-13-00863-CV Trial court case number: 2010-22875 Trial court: 333rd District Court of Harris County On December 27, 2013, appellant, David A. Newman, filed a motion to “consolidate herewith the record of prior appeal #01-10-01113-CV,” to “extend time to file 1.3.14 1st supplemental record ordered 11/7/13 and completed on 11/19/13 – but still unpaid for to[]date by appellee,” and to “extend time to file appellant’s brief by February 3,[] 2014.” We address appellant’s three separate requests in this order.

First, appellant seeks to consolidate the record from a prior appeal (cause no. 01-10- 01113-CV) with the record in the present appeal in order to avoid “duplication” of expenditures.

The Court issued an opinion in cause no. 01-10-01113-CV on December 29, 2011. Appellant cites no authority to support his argument that the records should be consolidated nor provides an explanation as to why the record in cause no. 01-10-01113-CV is necessary for this appeal.

Further, the record in the current appeal has already been filed. Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion to consolidate records.

In regards to appellant’s motion to extend time to file “1st supplemental record,” appellant does not specify the documents sought to be included in the supplemental clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(b)(2) (“A party requesting that an item be included in the clerk’s record must specifically describe the item so that the clerk can readily identify it.”).

Additionally, appellant’s motion for extension fails to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.5(b). See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b) (governing motions for extension). Thus, we DENY appellant’s motion. Further, to the extent that appellant’s motion seeks an extension in order to file documents contained in the supplemental clerk’s record filed with this Court on January 3, 2014, we dismiss the request as moot.

With respect to appellant’s motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief, appellant requests the due date for his brief be extended until February 3, 2014. Appellant’s brief was due December 9, 2013. Appellant has provided no explanation for the need for an extension in his motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C) (requiring moving party to state facts relied on to reasonably explain need for extension). Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion for extension to file appellant’s brief for failing to provide any explanation of the need for an extension. See id. Further, we ORDER appellant to file his brief, or a proper motion for extension of time providing a reasonable explanation of the need for an extension, no later than 10 days from the date of this order, or appellant’s appeal may be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 38.6(d), 38.8(a), 42.3(b).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 9, 2014