Opinion issued November 13, 2025

In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00824-CV ——————————— IN RE MARTIN RAY SOLIS, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Martin Ray Solis, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in connection with the underlying petition to modify the parent-child relationship filed by relator.1 In his mandamus petition, relator challenged the trial court’s: (1) September 12, 2025 “Dismissal Order,” dismissing of the modification proceeding for want of

The underlying case is In the Interest of M.S., Jr., a Child, Cause No. 2022-62410, in the 308th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Gloria E. Lopez presiding. prosecution; (2) refusal to set a hearing on a timely filed motion for reinstatement under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a(3); and (3) dismissal of the modification proceeding instead of entering a judgment in favor of relator confirming the trial court’s rendition. Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus requested that the Court “grant his petition for writ of mandamus and direct the [trial] court to vacate its order dismissing the case.”

In connection with his petition for writ of mandamus, relator also filed a “Motion for Temporary Relief” and requested that the Court grant temporary relief and issue temporary orders to “impos[e] the relief previously rendered by the trial court” in its July 21, 2025 rendition. The Court granted relator’s motion for temporary relief and requested a response to the petition for writ of mandamus.

On November 3, 2025, relator filed a “Motion to Dismiss Mandamus Proceedings as Moot.” In his motion, relator stated that all issues presented in his petition for writ of mandamus had “been resolved” and the relief requested in his petition was “now moot.” Relator therefore requested that this mandamus proceeding be dismissed.

The motion includes a certificate of conference stating that relator attempted to confer with real party in interest, Ashley Neese, but that she did not respond to relator’s attempts to confer to state whether she was opposed to dismissal of the original proceeding. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5). However, more than ten days

have passed and no party has responded to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3(a)(2).

We therefore lift our October 14, 2025 order, grant relator’s motion, and dismiss this mandamus proceeding. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Guiney, and Johnson.