Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-12-11211/USCOURTS-ca5-12-11211-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 

---

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-11211

THE INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, INCORPORATED, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; 

MICHAEL GERBER; LESLIE BINGHAM-ESCARENO; TOMAS 

CARDENAS; C KENT CONINE; DIONICIO VIDAL FLORES, Sonny; JUAN 

SANCHEZ MUNOZ; GLORIA L. RAY, In Their Official Capacities, 

 Defendants - Appellants

FRAZIER REVITALIZATION, INCORPORATED

 Intervenor-Appellant

Cons. with 13-10306

THE INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, INCORPORATED,

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; 

MICHAEL GERBER; LESLIE BINGHAM-ESCARENO; TOMAS 

CARDENAS; C. KENT CONNIE; DIONICIO VIDAL FLORES, Sonny; JUAN 

SANCHEZ MUNOZ; GLORIA L. RAY, In Their Official Capacities

 Defendants - Appellants

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 6, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 12-11211 Document: 00513145210 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/06/2015
No. 12-11211

2

Appeals from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before JONES, WIENER, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This case was returned to us on remand from the Supreme Court, No. 

13-1371, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, et al. v. 

Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., et al., following the Court’s grant of 

certiorari to consider our reversal of the district court’s judgment. Inclusive 

Cmtys. Project, Inc. v. Tex. Dep’t of Hous. & Cmty. Affairs, 747 F.3d 275 (5th 

Cir. 2014). The Supreme Court affirmed our judgment and remanded this case 

to us for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. Accordingly, we now 

remand this case to the United States District Court for the Northern District 

of Texas for further proceedings consistent with our opinion and the opinion of 

the Supreme Court. 

 Case: 12-11211 Document: 00513145210 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/06/2015