The following published opinions were released by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on July 15, 2008:

• Texas Clinical Labs Inc. v. Leavitt (Jones, Wiener, Clement, JJ.; opinion by Wiener, J.) (appeal from N.D. Tex.). Reversing and remanding in part, and affirming in part, district court’s dismissal of action brought by Texas Clinical Laboratories, Inc., Texas Clinical Laboratories - Gulf Division, Inc. (the incorporated appellants collectively “Texas Clinical Labs”), Texas Clinical Labs, LLC, Texas Clinical Labs - Gulf Division, LLC, and the Estate of Daniel P. Campbell Texas Clinical Labs (collectively, “appellants”), against the Department of Health and Human Services (”DHHS”). The appellants action against DHHS sought review of administrative decision denying them additional interest on Medicare reimbursement judgment entered by ALJ, and brought due process claim that DHHS’s misrepresentations during Medicare reimbursement hearing deprived the appellants of specific entitlements under the Social Security Act (”SSA”). The district court dismissed the suit on the basis that none of the appellants had proper standing or capacity to bring the claim. The Fifth Circuit held that Texas Clinical Labs had capacity to bring this suit despite failure to pay its franchise taxes because, under Texas law, Texas Clinical Labs had not forfeited its right to do business; finding that Texas Clinical Labs had capacity to bring this suit, the Fifth Circuit reversed the dismissal by the district court as to the claims for additional interest, and found it unnecessary to turn to the capacity and standing questions regarding the other plaintiffs. The Fifth Circuit then affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the appellants’ due process claim on the alternative ground that that claim was time-barred.
• U.S. v. Saenz (Higginbotham, Davis, Barksdale, JJ.; per curiam opinion) (appeal from S.D. Tex.). Affirming conviction of defendant for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kg of marijuana. The Fifth Circuit held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant’s speedy trial motion, finding that his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was not violated by the time period between his indictment in June 2003, his arrest in June 2005, and his trial in January 2007 because the delay was due in part to the defendant’s own actions in avoiding arrest and in moving for trial continuances. The Court then held that prior precedent precluded the defendant’s arguments as to the constitutionality of the federal statute under which he was convicted and as to the constitutionality of the district court judge applying sentencing enhancements that were not the result of jury findings; and that the photospread used in witness identifications did not violate constitutional standards.
• Kirksey v. Tonghai Maritime (Higginbotham, Davis, DeMoss, JJ.; opinion by Davis, J.) (appeal from S.D. Tex.). Reversing judgment in favor of longshoreman in action brought under 33 U.S.C. § 905(b). The Fifth Circuit held that the dangerous condition of the cargo - the unstable stowing of the cargo - was an open and obvious condition to the stevedore.

Additionally, the Court released a revised version of its opinion released originally on July 2, 2008, in Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. FTC.