






NUMBER 13-09-00311-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

______________________________________________________________
 
OSCAR FLORES, 	Appellant,

v.


DAIMLER CHRYSLER FINANCIAL 
SERVICES AMERICAS LLC., ET AL.,	Appellees. 
_____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

	Appellant, Oscar Flores, attempted to perfect an appeal from orders entered by the
County Court at Law No. 5 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-08-0038-E.  The
orders were signed on April 8, 2009, and appellant filed a notice of appeal on May 8, 2009.
	On June 19, 2009, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared the
notice of appeal was not timely filed.  Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not
corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court's letter, the appeal would
be dismissed.   Thereafter, appellant filed a motion to realign the parties and change style
of case, requesting this appeal now be considered a petition for writ of mandamus. 
Appellant has not responded to this Court's defect letter concerning the timeliness of the
appeal.
	Contemporaneous with the filing of appellant's motion to realign the parties and
change style of case, appellant filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus under this cause
number, 13-09-00311-CV.  Appellant's motion to realign the parties and thereby change
style of case is DENIED.  The Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed under this cause
number, 13-09-00311-CV is hereby transferred to cause number 13-09-00488-CV. 
Appellant is responsible for paying fees for the filing of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus
in cause number 13-09-00488-CV.
	The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's
failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant's failure to respond to this Court's notice,
is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly,
the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.  See Tex. R. App. P.
42.3(a)(c).
									PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion delivered and
filed this 25th day of August, 2009. 
