Rolando Rafael Saenz v. Las Blancas Minerals Limited Partnership, Pete Saenz Jr., and Graciela Saenz Martinez ( 2024 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-24-00550-CV
Rolando Rafael SAENZ,
Appellant
v.
LAS BLANCAS MINERALS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Pete Saenz Jr., and Graciela
Saenz Martinez,
Appellees
From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2023CVF000176D3
Honorable Rebecca Ramirez Palomo, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Irene Rios, Justice
Lori Massey Brissette, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 23, 2024
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION
On July 15, 2024, the trial court signed a final, appealable order. A notice of appeal was
due on August 14, 2024, and a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal was due on
August 29, 2024. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3.
On August 15, 2024, after the deadline to file the notice of appeal, Appellant filed a notice
of appeal without filing a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal. See generally
Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (“[A] motion for extension of time is
necessarily implied when an appellant acting in good faith files a [notice of appeal] beyond the
04-24-00550-CV
time allowed by Rule [26.1], but within the fifteen-day period in which the appellant would be
entitled to move to extend the filing deadline under Rule [26.3].” (emphasis added)).
On September 16, 2024, we ordered Appellant to show cause in writing by September 26,
2024, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b)
(requirements for a motion for extension of time); Garcia v. Kastner Farms, Inc., 774 S.W.2d 668,
670 (Tex. 1989) (reasonable explanation); TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a) (dismissal for want of
jurisdiction). We warned Appellant that if he failed to respond within the time provided, this
appeal would be dismissed. See id. R. 42.3(c) (dismissal for failure to comply with court order).
To date, Appellant has not filed any response to our September 16, 2024 order.
Appellant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for failing to timely file a notice of
appeal; Appellant has not complied with Rule 26.3. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3(b); Verburgt, 959
S.W.2d at 617. Thus, Appellant’s notice of appeal was not timely filed, and he has failed to invoke
this court’s appellate jurisdiction. See Schmidt Land Servs., Inc. v. Ashworth, No. 04-16-00203-
CV, 2016 WL 3031049, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 25, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.);
Hernandez v. Rimkus Consulting Grp., Inc., No. 01-11-00100-CV, 2011 WL 1900062, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Houston [1st Dist.] May 5, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.). We dismiss this appeal for want of
jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
PER CURIAM
-2-