December 13, 2022, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Banca Pueyo SA v. Lone Star Fund IX (US), L.P., 21-10776, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • Jones, J. (Jones, Stewart, Duncan), foreign discovery
    • Reversing 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) order for foreign discovery, and remanding for further proceedings.
    • The Court held that the district court “misconstrued our precedent and erroneously rebuffed respondents’ challenge” to a discovery order’s “validity pursuant to statutory requirements and the Supreme Court’s ‘Intel factors.'” (Citing Intel Corp. v. Advances Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004)).
    • This suit involves Portuguese litigation arising from the Portuguese central bank’s transfer and retransfer of debts and liabilities from a failed bank and sale of a new banking entity, prejudicing stockholders. The U.S. district court issued a subpoena for documents sought in discovery for the Portuguese litigation. After issuance of the subpoena, the respondent challenged the subpoena on the basis that the appellees failed to carry their burden under the statute and the Intel factors. The district court denied the challenge on its face, interpreting Texas Keystone, Inc. v. Prime Natural Resources, Inc., 694 F.3d 548 (5th Cir. 2012), as requiring a challenge in a motion to quash wherein the respondents/appellants would carry the burden of demonstrating the right to relief from the subpoenas.
    • The Court held that the approval of a request for a subpoena under § 1782(a) was not immune to adversarial testing. “Pretermitting a full adversary response to the propriety of the § 1782(a) application actually runs afoul of Intel, which admonished district courts to ‘ensure an airing adequate to determine what, if any, assistance is appropriate.’ Intel, 542 U.S. at 266.”
  • Newell-Davis v. Phillips, 22-30166, appeal from E.D. La.
    • Stewart, J. (King, Stewart, Haynes), Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process, Equal Protection
    • Affirming dismissal of challenge to Louisiana’s Facility Need Review (“FNR”) program for licensure of respite caregivers, on Privilege or Immunities Clause challenge and on basis of due process and equal protection.
    • As to the equal protection claims, the Court held that rational basis review applied, and held that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of “negat[ing] every conceivable basis which might support” the FNR program. “Here, the FNR program survives rational basis review because it advances the State’s legitimate interest in enhancing consumer welfare. … At best, [prohibited] economic protectionism is an incidental result of the FNR program.”
    • As to the due process claims, the Court held, again, that the plaintiff’s claims do not satisfy rational basis review, even assuming (without deciding) that the “right to earn a living in a chosen profession free from unreasonable government interference” is a protectable right.
    • As to the Privilege or Immunities Clause claim, the plaintiff conceded that the “uniquely federal rights” covered by that clause are not at issue.

Unpublished

  • Wilson v. City of Southlake, 21-10771, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Willett, Engelhardt, Wilson), Americans with Disabilities Act
    • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of intentional discrimination claims under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act.
  • Starks v. Davis, 21-11154, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Southwick, Engelhardt), mandamus
    • Affirming denial of motion for mandamus.
  • Hoover Panel Systems, Inc. v. HAT Contract, Inc., 21-11200, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Smith, Graves), breach of contract, trade secrets
    • Affirming dismissal of breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets claims arising from confidentiality agreement.
  • U.S. v. Vasquez, 21-40929, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Higginson, Willett), criminal
    • Affirming conviction and 63-month sentence for smuggling goods from the U.S. into Mexico, upholding admission into evidence of prior lawful firearm transactions.
  • U.S. v. Roman-Roman, 21-51079, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Elrod, Engelhardt), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • Gonzalez-Aguilar v. Garland, 21-60867, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Smith, Dennis, Southwick), immigration
    • Dismissing in part and denying in part Mexican citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing appeal of IJ’s denial of application for cancellation of removal.
  • U.S. v. Gonzalez, 22-10292, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Graves, Ho), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Onate-Herrera, 22-10559, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Graves, Ho), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • Chancey v. BASF, 22-40442, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Haynes, Oldham), special master
    • Dismissing for lack of appellate jurisdiction appeal from denial of motion to appoint special master.
  • U.S. v. Velazquez-Sosa, 22-40488, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Duncan, Engelhardt), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Singh v. RiverSource Life Insurance Co., 22-50036, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Duncan, Wilson), insurance
    • Affirming judgment that insurance company owed disability benefits to insured.
  • U.S. v. Ornelas, 22-50060, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Duncan, Wilson), criminal, supervised release
    • Affirming conviction and sentence on possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute and possession of a firearm in furtherance of that offense, including imposition of risk-notification provision of supervised release term.
  • U.S. v. Velasquez-Roldan, 22-50255, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • Southwick, J. (Higginbotham, Southwick, Higginson), criminal, sentencing
    • Vacating 21-month sentence on conviction of illegal reentry, and remanding for resentencing.
  • U.S. v. Bernal-Ceto, 22-50370, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Duncan, Wilson), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Leanos, 22-50395, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Graves, Ho), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Banegas v. Garland, 22-60155, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Jolly, Oldham, Wilson), immigration
    • Denying Honduran citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing appeal of IJ’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT.