in the Interest of C. B. & M. B.

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTIONS

Cause number: 01-18-01086-CV Style: In the Interest of C.B. and M.B., Children Date motions filed*: March 4 and 13, 2019 Type of motions: Letter-Motions to Stay and for Rehearing/Rehearing En Banc and Updated Letter-Motion for Rehearing/Rehearing En Banc Party filing motions: Court Reporter Cara Massey Document to be filed: N/A

If motion to extend time: Original due date: January 22, 2019 Number of extensions granted: 1 Current Due Date: March 13, 2019 Date Requested: N/A (stay pending rehearing/en banc review)

Ordered that motion is:  Granted in part  Denied  Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)  Other: _____________________________________ Because court reporters may only file requests to extend the time to file the reporter’s record, via information sheets, the letter-motion to stay, construed as an extension request, is dismissed as moot because the reporter’s record was filed on March 13, 2019, after payment was made. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(c). Accordingly, the court reporter’s letter-motions and updated letter-motions for rehearing/rehearing en banc are dismissed for want of jurisdiction because only “parties” have standing to file motions. See TEX. R. APP. P. 3.1(a) (“Appellant means a party taking an appeal to an appellate court”), (c) (“Appellee means a party adverse to an appellant”), (g) (court reporter), 10.1(a) (“Unless these rules prescribe another form, a party must apply by motion for an order or other relief.”), 49.1, 49.7 (“A party may file a motion for en banc reconsideration, with or without filing a motion for rehearing.”) (emphasis added).

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Laura C. Higley____________ x Acting individually Acting for the Court Date: __March 19, 2019___