Memorandum Opinion by Justice DORI CONTRERAS.
Appellants D.R. and M.E., proceeding pro se, attempted to perfect an appeal from several different orders signed on June 14, 2017 in cause number 2016-FAM-61938-5 in County Court at Law No. 5 of Nueces County, Texas. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that there was no final, appealable judgment. On June 28, 2017, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. These notices were sent by both regular mail and certified mail to appellants' shared address. Appellants were advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The notices sent by certified mail were returned to this Court designated as "return to sender— attempted—not known—unable to forward." A deputy clerk at this Court contacted the trial court to verify that the appellants' addresses were correct and was advised that the addresses utilized here were the same as those on file with the trial court. Appellants failed to respond to the Court's notices. On July 20, 2017, the Clerk resent these notices to appellants by first-class mail and certified mail. The notices sent by certified mail were returned designated as "return to sender—attempted—not known—unable to forward." The notices sent by regular mail were designated as "return to sender—not deliverable as addressed—unable to forward."
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b) requires unrepresented parties to sign any document filed and "give the party's mailing address, telephone number, fax number, if any, and email address." See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.1(b). Appellants have neither provided this court with a forwarding address or taken any other action to correct the defect or otherwise prosecute this appeal.
Rule 42.3 permits an appellate court, on its own initiative after giving ten days' notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution or for failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c). Rule 2 authorizes an appellate court to suspend a rule's operation in a particular case to expedite a decision. See id. 2. Given the length of inactivity in this appeal and this court's inability to give effective notice to appellant during the period of inactivity, we suspend Rule 42.3's requirement of ten days' notice to all parties, and dismiss the appeal on our own motion. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c).