Opinion
04-22-00318-CV
08-17-2022
Roberto ALVAREZ Jr., Appellant v. Shoko DANESHMAND, Appellee
From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2022CI00348 Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
On May 24, 2022, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal stating his intent to appeal from the trial court's final decree of divorce, which was signed on April 13, 2022. Because appellant did not file a motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion for reinstatement, or request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on May 13, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on May 30, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. While appellant filed his notice of appeal within the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.3, he did not file a motion for extension of time.
A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. See id.; Tex.R.App.P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C).
Therefore, we ordered appellant to file a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. We explained that if appellant failed to response within the time provided in our order, this appeal would be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). Appellant failed to timely response to our order. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. See id.
DISMISSED.