Case: 19-40605 Document: 00515658372 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/02/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 2, 2020 No. 19-40605 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Ronald S. Hines, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Jessica Quillivan, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, in her official capacity as President of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Keith Pardue, in his official capacity as Vice President of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Sandra “Lynn” Criner, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Michael White, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, in his official capacity as a Member of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Samantha Mixon, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, in her official capacity as a Member of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Randall Skaggs, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, in his official capacity as a Member of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Carlos Chacon, in his official capacity as a Member of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; Sue Allen, Licensed Veterinary Technician, in her official capacity as a Member of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners; George Antuna, in his official Case: 19-40605 Document: 00515658372 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/02/2020 No. 19-40605 capacity as a Member of the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners, Defendants—Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:18-CV-155 Before Elrod, Southwick, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Leslie H. Southwick, Circuit Judge: Does a veterinarian have a right to engage in telemedicine for a pet he has not physically examined? The plaintiff claims that right exists. He filed suit, challenging Texas’s physical-examination requirement for vets, which prohibits vets from offering individualized advice to pet owners unless the vet previously examined the animal. In 2015, we rejected the plaintiff’s claims under the First Amendment and Equal Protection Clause. Now, he claims that new precedent from the Supreme Court and this circuit dictate a different result. The plaintiff filed suit again in 2018, re-raising his First Amendment claims. He also added a new equal-protection claim based on Texas’s different telemedicine rules for physicians and veterinarians. The district court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. We AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, and REMAND. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Dr. Ronald Hines, a licensed veterinarian in Texas, stopped practicing what might be called traditional veterinary medicine in 2002 due to his age 2 Case: 19-40605 Document: 00515658372 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/02/2020 No. 19-40605 and physical limitations. Soon thereafter, he began using his website to write articles about pet health. People around the world began emailing Hines for advice about their own pets. Hines offered individualized advice over email and phone, and in 2003, he added to his website a flat fee for veterinary advice. Under Texas law, the “[p]ractice of veterinary medicine” ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals