Opinion
05-23-00660-CV
07-27-2023
HARMEET SINGH, Appellant v. RATEGAIN TRAVEL TECHNOLOGIES, LIMITED ANDRATEGAIN TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Appellees
On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-22-06923
Before Burns Chief Justice, Molberg, Justice and Goldstein Justice
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
By notice of appeal filed on July 6, 2023, appellant challenges the trial court's amended order granting appellees' motion to compel arbitration. In the order, the trial court also stated that it granted appellant permission to appeal the order. Because there is no statutory authority allowing an appeal of an order granting a motion to compel arbitration under either the Texas Arbitration Act, see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 171.098(a)(1), or Federal Arbitration Act, see id. § 51.016, 9 U.S.C. § 16(b), and filing a notice of appeal is not the proper vehicle to pursue a permissive appeal, see Tex. R. App. P. 28.3., we questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal. As directed, appellant filed a letter brief addressing the jurisdictional issues.
In his letter brief, appellant states that he will file a petition for permissive appeal. Because the filing of the notice of appeal is not the proper vehicle and failed to give this Court jurisdiction over the appealed order, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
JUDGMENT
Justices Molberg and Goldstein participating.
In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellees RATEGAIN TRAVEL TECHNOLOGIES, LIMITED AND RATEGAIN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. recover their costs of this appeal from appellant HARMEET SINGH.
Judgment entered.