Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-24-00640-CV Hien Minh CAO, Appellant v. Nhi Ngoc LE, Appellee From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2023CI21924 Honorable Nadine Melissa Nieto, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice Velia J. Meza, Justice Delivered and Filed: April 16, 2025 DISMISSED On February 28, 2025, we struck the document we construed as Appellant Hien Minh Cao’s brief for failing to comply with briefing rules under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4, 9.5, 9.9, 38.1. We ordered Appellant to file an amended brief that complies with the rules by March 31, 2025. Finally, we warned Appellant that, unless he filed a rules- compliant brief, we could strike any amended brief that failed to comply with the rules, prohibit him from filing another brief, and dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 38.9(a), 42.3(b), (c); Grinage v. Thompson, No. 04-21-00516-CV, 2022 WL 3639311, at *3 (Tex. App.— 04-24-00640-CV

San Antonio Aug. 24, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op.); Le v. Nguyen, No. 02-20-00219-CV, 2021 WL 1918759, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth May 13, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Appellant filed two letters in response to our order. In the first letter, filed on March 13, 2025, Appellant complains about the actions of the appellee and her children. We construe this letter as a brief. Even construing the letter as a brief, however, the letter-brief omits: • A table of contents; • An index of authorities; • A statement of the case; • A statement of issues presented; • A statement of facts pertaining to the events in the trial court; • A summary of the argument; • A clear and concise argument; • Citations to authorities; • Citations to the record; • A prayer; • An appendix; • An acknowledgement of service by Appellee’s lead counsel or a certificate of service; and • A certificate of compliance.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4(i)(3), 9.5(d), 38.1(b)–(d), (f)–(k). Further, the letter-brief violates Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.9 in that it includes unredacted sensitive data—dates of birth, visa numbers, social security numbers, green card numbers, passport numbers, and driver’s license numbers. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.9(b), (c), (d).

In the second letter, filed on March 27, 2025, Appellant simply states the following:

Even construing the briefing rules liberally, we are unable to construe this letter as an appellant’s brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4(i)(3), 9.5(d), 38.1(b)–(d), (f)–(k).

-2- 04-24-00640-CV

Appellant has twice failed to submit a brief that complies with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Accordingly, we strike Appellant’s letter-brief filed on March 13, 2025, prohibit appellant from filing another brief, and dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4, 9.5, 9.9, 38.1, 38.8(a)(1), 38.9(a), 42.3(b), (c); Grinage, 2022 WL 3639311, at *3; Nguyen, 2021 WL 1918759, at *1. We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

-3-