                                      In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                           ____________________
                              NO. 09-16-00092-CV
                           ____________________

                        ALLEN F. CALTON, Appellant

                                        V.

                              G. EKEKE, Appellee
_______________________________________________________            ______________

                    On Appeal from the 58th District Court
                          Jefferson County, Texas
                         Trial Cause No. A-198,064
________________________________________________________            _____________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant Allen F. Calton filed a notice of appeal of the trial court’s denial

of his “Motion for Preliminary Injunction.” The clerk’s record demonstrates that

the initial relief requested was a temporary restraining order pending subsequent

hearings on a temporary injunction and permanent mandatory injunctive relief, and

the trial court treated the motion as an application for a temporary restraining

order. On April 6, 2016, we notified Calton that his appeal was subject to dismissal

because the notice of appeal neither stated that a final order had been signed nor

                                         1
identified an interlocutory order for which an appeal was available. In his response,

Calton concedes he is appealing the denial of a temporary restraining order, but he

argues the appeal may proceed as an appeal from the denial of a temporary

injunction.

      A temporary restraining order directs the conduct of a party pending

imminent disposition of a request for a temporary injunction. See In re Tex. Nat.

Res. Conservation Comm’n, 85 S.W.3d 201, 205 (Tex. 2002). An interlocutory

order on an application for a temporary restraining order is generally not an

appealable order. Rakowitz v. Bexar Cty. Sheriffs Dep’t, No. 04-13-00093-CV,

2013 WL 2446725, at *1 (Tex. App—San Antonio June 5, 2013, no pet.) (mem.

op.). Calton’s response does not show grounds for continuing the appeal. This

appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

      APPEAL DISMISSED.




                                              ________________________________
                                                      CHARLES KREGER
                                                            Justice

Submitted on May 11, 2016
Opinion Delivered May 12, 2016

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.

                                          2
