Whole Mobility, Inc. v. George A. Talamas, Individually, and George A. Talamas, Inc., D/B/A Watchtronics and D/B/A Marglo II
This text of Whole Mobility, Inc. v. George A. Talamas, Individually, and George A. Talamas, Inc., D/B/A Watchtronics and D/B/A Marglo II (Whole Mobility, Inc. v. George A. Talamas, Individually, and George A. Talamas, Inc., D/B/A Watchtronics and D/B/A Marglo II) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00317-CV
WHOLE MOBILITY, INC., Appellant
v.
George A. TALAMAS, Individually, and George A. Talamas, Inc., d/b/a Watchtronics and d/b/a Marglo II, Appellees
From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas Trial Court No. 2024CVH000055D3 Honorable Rebecca Ramirez Palomo, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Irene Rios, Justice Velia J. Meza, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 30, 2025
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
In this appeal, the clerk’s record was due on June 20, 2025. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.1. On
June 20, 2025, the Webb County District Clerk notified this court that appellant had not paid the
clerk’s fee for preparing the record and that appellant is not entitled to the record free of cost.
On June 26, 2025, we ordered appellant to file written proof by July 11, 2025, that either
(1) the clerk’s fee has been paid or arrangements satisfactory to the clerk have been made to pay 04-25-00317-CV
the clerk’s fee, or that appellant is entitled to the clerk’s record without prepayment of such fees
and (2) that a request for the court reporter’s record was made. We warned appellant that if he
failed to respond as ordered, this appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 37.3(b).
To date, appellant has not filed any response with this court. Therefore, we dismiss this
appeal for want of prosecution. See id. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c).
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Whole Mobility, Inc. v. George A. Talamas, Individually, and George A. Talamas, Inc., D/B/A Watchtronics and D/B/A Marglo II, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whole-mobility-inc-v-george-a-talamas-individually-and-george-a-texapp-2025.