Maulik Modi v. Niti Atre

Opinion issued December 20, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas ————————————

NO. 01-16-00513-CV ———————————

MAULIK MODI, Appellant

V.

NITI ATRE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 311th District Court Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2009-44214

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Maulik Modi, appeals from an order in a suit to modify the parent- child relationship. Appellant’s brief was originally due on September 8, 2016. Two extensions were granted. On October 25, 2016, we granted appellant’s counsel’s motion to withdraw and directed counsel to notify appellant in writing of any deadlines not previously disclosed and to file a copy of this notice within ten days. On October 25, 2016, counsel filed a copy of a letter sent to appellant advising him that the brief was due on November 7, 2016. No brief was filed.

On November 9, 2016, appellee filed a motion to dismiss for want of prosecution because appellant had not filed a brief. The certificate of service indicates this motion was delivered to appellant by certified mail, return receipt requested. After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond to the motion and has not filed a brief or sought an extension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal).

Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Massengale, Brown, and Huddle.