Now COMES JOHN E. ROGARTE SA, APPEIIANT, IN PROPIA PESSOVA ON THE DATE OF SEXTEMBER 02, 2012 FOR THE ABOVE STYLLO AND NUMBERED CAUSE OF ACTION, ASKS FOR LEARE OF COURT, TO PRESENT THE FOLLOWING: 1. ON SEPTEMBER OII 2012 APPEIIANT ROGARTE SA, DID RECEIVE CONSELEONDENCE FROM THIS COURT, THAT ON AUGUST 24, 2012 RECEIVED APPEIIANTS DETECTION AND PROTEST, OF APPELICES' LATE FILING OF THEIR BRIEF, DUE ON TULY IDIZOIE FILES-TULY IT, 2012 APPERANTI ALSO RECEIVED APPERICES' MOTION FOR FILING AN OUT OF TIME APPERAL, DATED AUGUST 27, 2012. FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS ALFEE MR. HOTTLE RECEIVED AND FILED APPERICES' MOTION FOR OUT OF TIME BRIEF ON AUGUST 27, 2015. 2. IT WOULD APPEAR, THAT APPELICES WERE NOT HOMEE OF THIS ISSUE, UNTIL THE APPELICES WERE MADE AWARE OF THEIR ENADR BY APPERIANT, BY HILL FILING OF DISTECTION AND PROTEST TO SAID LATE FILING ERROR. 3. NOV, APPELICES IT PROUGH THEIR LOUNGED MR. JASON T. COUTARRAS, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY ELENALAL OF TEXAS, APPEARS TO LESSEN THE ERROR, BY STATING IN THE OUT OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF, "TUST ONE DAY" I NEN INCORECULV STATES A TULU 16, 2016 DATE, WHICH HALL VET TO HAPPEN, WAS NOT THE DATE THAT THE HONDRAble JUSTICE OF THE COURT ISSUED.

*2

1. (Cont.) APPELIGES STATE, THAT SUCH ALLOUMEL OF A LATE FICING "WILL NOT PRECUGICE APPELIMAT", AND THAT "APPELIMAT'S UNITIMEINESS OF HIS OBSSECTION AND PROFEST TO APPELIGES, LATE BRUVE, ENGLLS BE OVERWIDD AND THE APPELIGES, WITHIN
2. THIRERORE,COMES APPELIMATES COMPLAINS, AND SEEKS FURTHER ENTERVENTION ISY THIS HONDRAble COURT. IN THE FORM OF FRORER LEGAL ACTION, FORMAL ACTION.
3. IT WOULD, F, AST APPELER, THAT THE APPELIGES, ARE SPARKING FOR APPELIMAT ROORATE SA, ISY SAING THAT SAID LATE FICING, WILL NOT PRECUGICE APPELIMAT, AND THAT APPELIMAT'S DISSECTION AND PROFEST, IS UNTIMELY. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE AS DLAIMES BY APPELIGES, FIRST, SUGH GLAIM OF NON-FRERIAGLE, WOULD ONLY SERVE TO FREUUGICE APPELIMAT, SECAUSE IT WOULD SHOUL THAT, ISY LALY NO BRIVE WAS FICED BY APPELIGES, I NLEL NO OPOSITION TO APPELIMAT'S CAINS, WOULD AFFECT A POSSIBLE FRORADES DECISION BY THE TUSSELCE OF THIS COURT FOR APPELIMAT, SUGH A GLAIM BY APPELIGES, THAT TMEIR ALLOUMES TO FIC LATE, WOULD PRISUGICE APPELIMAT'S SUB- STANTIAL RIGHTS. APPELIGES' GLAIM, THAT APPELIMAT'S OBSSECION AND PROTEST, AS UNITIMELY IS ALSO INCOVERECT, IN THAT, THE FROOF IS IN "THE FURGING" AMONG OTAER TAINES, SHOULS THAT SAID OFFICE OF THE TENN ATTORNEY GENERAL, WITHOUT A FLAILSIBLE EXPLASE, AS A DEATA IN THE FAMILY, OR ACT OF LADD, OR AFRICAILT FROM THIS COURT'S EVERY, THAT WOULD EXPLAIN LINKALAILABIIIIY OF THE CULAR'S OFFICE ON TULY INZDIS, WOULD SHOULD THET APPELIGES, WILL ALL OF TMEIR RESOURCES AT THEIR IS DOLL, ARE IN DEBALLY.
4. THIRERORE, APPELIGES, ARE AMONG OTHER TIINGE, ASSING THIS COURT FOR FADRTISM, EVEN WHEN THE APPELIGES ARE IN EOUTRANECTION THERMEEING, THLZ APPELIMAT ROORATE SA, MUST COMPLAIN IN SAID FASIION, AND FEELS THAT FOEML ACTION IS DEEMED NECESSARY, ESPECIALLY DUE TO THE FACTS OF THE GLAINE SEING RATSED BY APPELIMAT FOR THIS APPEAL IN THE FIRST FLACE AND APPELIGES' ONLY CONCERN IS TO AVOID LIGG, IIYE AND RESPONSIG, IIYE TO THE APPELIMAT ROORATE SA. RESPECTFULM EUEMIRAD. Z.

*3 ROGRES'S NOTICE OF COMPLAINT/REGULOT FOR FORNAL-MOND ( $1/22/2016$ )

PRAYER APPEIIRAT ROORRTE SA y PRAVS TO GOO IN THE AIGNEST TIMT THE HONDRAble COURT ANANT THE REI! 3 OUGHT, AS it is FLEAD TO. RESPETEELUY DOME,

CERTIFERATE OF SERVICE

THIS IS TO BERTIVY, THAT A TRUE ANO CORRECT CODV OF THIS FOREGOING DOCUMENT, HAS BEEN SENT BY FIRST CLASS MAIL TO, EX TASON T. CONTERAS, ASS IETANT ATTORNEV EENEING OF TENES, P.O. BOX 12548 AUSTIN, TEXAS 48711-2548

EXECUTED ON THIS SEPTEMBER OZ, ZOIE

RESPETTENY DOMES

J.R. J.R. 09/02/2016 3.

*4