Case: 15-10326 Document: 00513355030 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/25/2016
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 15-10326 FILED
Summary Calendar January 25, 2016
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
ROSE ANN JUAREZ,
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
HIGHLAND HOMES, LIMITED; REUNION TITLE; BANK OF AMERICA
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, formerly known as CWB Mortgage Ventures,
L.L.C., doing business as Highland Loansource; MERS; PROVENCE AT
FIREWHEEL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED, et al;
SFTF HOLDINGS, L.L.C., et al,
Defendants - Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:14-CV-2173
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Proceeding pro se, Rose Ann Juarez appeals the district court’s dismissal
of her action seeking, inter alia, to enjoin the foreclosure of her property after
she defaulted on her mortgage payments. The district court dismissed all of
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Case: 15-10326 Document: 00513355030 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/25/2016
No. 15-10326
Juarez’s claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) upon concluding that they
were barred by res judicata in light of her previous lawsuit that involved
substantially the same parties and the same transaction. In addition, the
district court concluded that Juarez’s complaint had failed to allege sufficient
facts stating a plausible claim against Reunion given that Reunion “was not a
party to the mortgage, did not receive title to the Property, was not a payee, or
the seller or lender of the Property, or a beneficiary to the deed of trust.”
In her brief on appeal, Juarez identifies no error in the district court’s
reasoning that her claims were barred by res judicata or that her complaint
failed to state a claim against Reunion. Although we must liberally construe
the briefs of pro se litigants, “pro se parties must still brief the issues and
reasonably comply with the standards of Rule 28.” Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d
523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). Given her failure to adequately identify any error in
the district court’s decision, Juarez’s brief does not comply with the Federal
Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Toala v. Marriott White Lodging Corporate,
456 F. App’x 476, 477 (5th Cir. 2012). Therefore, we DISMISS the appeal for
want of prosecution. See id.
2