Dismissed and Opinion Filed November 10, 2015.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-14-00446-CV

ORYON TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND ORYON TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Appellants

V.

M. RICHARD MARCUS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-01252

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang, Evans, and Whitehill

Opinion by Justice Evans

This is an appeal of a temporary and permanent sealing order signed April 10, 2014.1 On 

September 23, 2015, we granted the motion to withdraw filed by appellants’ counsel of record. 

Because appellants are corporations, we advised appellants that they could only appear before 

this Court through an attorney. See Kunstoplast of Am., Inc. v. Formosa Plastics Corp., 937 

S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996); Simmons, Jannace & Stagg, L.L.P. v. Buzbee Law Firm, 324 

S.W.3d 833, 833 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.). We ordered appellants to file 

within thirty days of the date of the order, the name, State Bar number, mailing address, email 

address, and telephone number of new counsel. We advised appellants that failure to provide the 

required information within the time specified would result in the dismissal of the appeal without 

 

1

On May 7, 2014, the Court was advised that appellants had filed bankruptcy petitions in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the 

Northern District of Texas. We abated the appeal and administratively closed the case. By order dated September 23, 2015 we reinstated the case 

following notification that the bankruptcy court had dismissed the bankruptcy cases filed by each appellant. 
–2–

further notice. To date we have received no response from either appellant.2 Accordingly, we 

dismiss the appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

140446F.P05

 

2

Notice of the Court’s order was sent to the domestic address on file with the Court for appellants as well as to two foreign addresses 

provided by appellants’ counsel in their motion to withdraw as counsel of record. The copy of the order mailed to the domestic address on file 

with the Court was returned as undeliverable. The Court attempted to contact appellants at the telephone number provided to the Court, but the 

telephone number was invalid. Appellants have failed in their “continuing duty to keep the court and parties apprised of their correct and current 

address” so that the Court may comply with its duty to send notification to the parties in the case. Mitchell v. Mitchell, No. 11-10-00188-CV, 

2011 WL 2112759, at *1 (Tex. App.—Eastland May 27, 2011, no pet.); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 6.3

/David W. Evans/

DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ORYON TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND 

ORYON TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, 

Appellants

No. 05-14-00446-CV V.

M. RICHARD MARCUS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-01252.

Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. Justices 

Lang and Whitehill participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee M. RICHARD MARCUS recover his costs of this appeal 

from appellants ORYON TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND ORYON TECHNOLOGIES, LLC.

Judgment entered this 10th day of November, 2015.