In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont __________________ NO. 09-25-00074-CV __________________ TOM RAGSDALE, Appellant V. FNALS, LLC, Appellee __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6 Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 24-34282 __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION On February 24, 2025, Tom Ragsdale filed a notice of appeal from a final judgment of the County Court at Law No. 6, signed on February 11, 2025. On May 14, 2025, the County Clerk notified the Court that the appellant neither paid for the clerk’s record nor filed a designation of record. On May 14, 2025, we notified the parties that the appellant had not established indigent status and that the clerk’s record had not been filed due to the appellant’s failure to pay or to arrange to pay the fee required to prepare the clerk’s record. We also warned the appellant that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution unless the appellant established that the appellant had made the arrangements required to pay the fee or that he needed more time to do so. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). After the Clerk sent the parties a letter warning of the consequences of a failure to take the action necessary to file the clerk’s record, the Court did not receive a response. On July 28, 2025, the trial court clerk notified the appellate court that the appellant still had not submitted the requested payment. That day the appellate clerk sent another notice warning that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution, but the Court did not receive a response.

Due to the appellant’s failure to respond to a notice from the Clerk that required a response within a specified time, and in the absence of a satisfactory explanation that justifies the appellant’s failure to pay or make the arrangements needed to pay for the clerk’s record to support the appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See id. 37.3(b), 42.3(b)-(c), 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM Submitted on August 28, 2025 Opinion Delivered August 29, 2025 Before Golemon, C.J., Wright and Chambers, JJ.