Dismissed and Opinion Filed June 28, 2024.

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-01166-CV IN THE INTEREST OF K.I., E.I., AND R.I., III, CHILDREN On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-22-05215 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Pedersen, III, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness Appellant filed her brief on February 29, 2024. We then notified appellant, who is proceeding pro se, that her brief failed to comply with rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. We listed numerous defects in the brief, including that it did not contain a table of contents or a statement of the case supported by record references. Further, no part of the brief contained any citations to the record or any authorities. We instructed appellant to file an amended brief correcting these deficiencies within ten days. In the request, we cautioned appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal if appellant failed to file an amended brief. To date, appellant has neither filed an amended brief nor corresponded with the Court concerning the status of appellant’s brief.

The purpose of an appellant’s brief is to acquaint the Court with the issues in a case and to present argument that will enable us to decide the case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9. The right to appellate review extends only to complaints made in accordance with our rules of appellate procedure, which require an appellant to concisely articulate the issues the court will be asked to decide, to make clear, concise, and specific arguments in support of appellant’s position, to cite appropriate authorities, and to specify the pages in the record where each alleged error can be found. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1; Lee v. Abbott, No. 05-18-01185-CV, 2019 WL 1970521, at *1 (Tex. App—Dallas May 3, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.); Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App—Dallas 2010, no pet.). Even liberally construing appellant’s brief, we conclude it fails to acquaint the Court with the issues in the case, does not enable us to decide the case, does not make clear, concise, specific arguments, and is in flagrant violation of rule 38.

Although given the opportunity to correct the brief, appellant did not do so. Under these circumstances, we strike appellant’s brief and dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(b),(c).

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/ ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS JUSTICE 231166F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT IN THE INTEREST OF K.I., E.I., On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial AND R.I., III, CHILDREN District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-22-05215.

No. 05-23-01166-CV Opinion delivered by Justice Partida- Kipness. Justices Pedersen, III and Carlyle participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

Judgment entered June 28, 2024

–3–