Eduardo Reyna, Individually and as personal Representative of the Estate of Elva Reyna, deceased, and for and on behalf of all of those entitled to recover for the wrongful death of Elva Reyna, deceased, under the Texas Wrongful Death Act, et al. v. JESUS RODRIGUEZ-AGUERO, M.D.--Appeal from 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County

NUMBER 13-04-565-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

EDUARDO REYNA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE

OF ELVA REYNA, DECEASED, ET AL., Appellants,

v.

JESUS RODRIGUZ-AGUERO, M.D., Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 92nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Ya ez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, EDUARDO REYNA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ELVA REYNA, DECEASED, ET AL., attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-352-03-A. Judgment in this cause was signed on June 11, 2004. A timely motion for new trial was filed on July 8, 2004. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellants notice of appeal was due on September 9, 2004, but was not filed until September 24, 2004.

Notice of this defect was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellants were 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. To date, no response has been received from appellants. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants failure to timely perfect their appeal, appellants failure to respond to this Court s notice, and appellee s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellee s motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 24th day of March, 2005.