In Re Joshua Christopher Ryan v. the State of Texas

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

petition. See In re R.B., No. 05-21-01063-CV, 2022 WL 202986, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 24,

2022, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (“We also strike the petition and supporting appendix for

relator’s failure to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.9’s redaction requirements.”);

In re Read, No. 05-23-00028-CV, 2023 WL 355145, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 23, 2023,

orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (denying mandamus relief and then striking petition for failure to

comply with Rule 9.9 by including a minor’s full name in the petition).

MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice

June 9, 2026

Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox, and Soto, JJ.

Footnotes

1. No. 08-26-00239-CV ———————————— In re Joshua Christopher Ryan AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N Relator, Joshua Christopher Ryan, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, requesting that we stop all proceedings in the trial court; direct the Honorable Selina Saenz to vacate an order transferring the underlying case to the 65th District Court; vacate all actions taken after the alleged recusal of a previous judge; sustain Ryan’s plea to the jurisdiction, and “dismiss the underlying action with prejudice for an absolute want of jurisdiction”; and dismiss “all related cases.” After consideration, the Court has determined that Ryan has not established that he is entitled to the relief sought. We deny the petition. We dismiss any pending motions as moot. In addition, Ryan included prohibited sensitive data—the name of a child who was a minor when the underlying suit was filed—in his petition. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.9(a)(3). We strike the