I)ISMISS; Opinion Filed January 18, 2013.
in l’he
Qtnurt nf pprzt1a
fift1! Di!itnrt uf ixai at Da11ai
No. 05-12-01353-CV
CQ ENTERPRISES CORPORATION, Appellant
V.
INAVATALI RAJANI AND TIlE RAJANI GROUP, Appdllee
On Appeal from the l93rdJudicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-11-05188
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Moseley, Francis, and Lang
Opinion By Justice Lang
The notice of this restricted appeal from the trial court’s February 9, 20 12 judgment was due
no later than August 7, 2012 or, with a timely extension motion, August 22. 2012. See TEX. R. App.
P.26.1(c), 26.3. GQ Enterprises Corporation filed the notice August 13, 2012, within the extension
period. However, it did not file a motion for extension of time explaining the need for the extension,
as required by the rules of appellate procedure. See it!. 10.5(b), 26.3. By letter dated November 6,
20 1 2, we directed GQ Enterprises to file, within ten days, a motion for extension of time that
complied with the rules. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). To date, GQ
Enterprises has neither filed the extension motion nor otherwise corresponded with the Court.
The timely tiling ot a notice oi appeal is jurisdictional. ‘‘c l’i*x. R. API’. P. 25. 1(h): (a;a
v, Hihernia A/at’! Bank, 227 S.W.3d 233, 233 (Tex, fist Dist,i 2007, no pet.’).
Because (iQ Enterprises’s notice ol appeal was untimely and (iQ Enterprises has thiled to olter a
reasonable explanation why the notice as late, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Gai;a. 227
S.W.3d at 233. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
L
2
4
I / LV
1OUGLAS S. LANG
9
JUST1
121353F.P05
—
tinrt uf
.FiftI! fl6trict nf Jixa at 3aItas
JUDGMENT
GQ ENTERPRISES CORPORATION, Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court
Appellant of Dallas County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. DC-il-
05188).
No. 05-12-01353-CV V. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang, Justices
Moseley and Francis participating.
INAYATALI RAJANI AND THE RAJANI
GROUP, Appellees
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. We ORDER
that appellee Inayatali Rajani and The Rajani Group recover their costs, if any, of this appeal from
appellant GQ Enterprises Corporation.
Judgment entered January 18, 2013.
/ 7 72
(1 ‘
2 //j. L/
DOUGLAS S. LANG
JUSTICJ