Esparza v. Partington, et al, No. 19-10890 (5th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on July 6, 2021.
Download PDF
Case: 19-10890 Document: 00516279304 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/13/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 13, 2022 No. 19-10890 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Dominique Esparza, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Abe Partington; Dustin Koch; City of Waxahachie, Defendants—Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:18-CV-1336 Before Stewart, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Dominique Esparza, Texas prisoner # 02239621, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-10890 Document: 00516279304 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/13/2022 No. 19-10890 Esparza did not file a timely notice of appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), and, on limited remand, the district court denied his construed motion to reopen the appeal period under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6). Esparza has abandoned any challenge to that denial by failing to brief it, despite having been given the opportunity to do so. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); see also Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Because Esparza did not file a timely notice of appeal and because the district court denied his Rule 4(a)(6) motion to reopen the time for filing an appeal, we lack jurisdiction over the instant appeal. See Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. Esparza’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.