Case Name: ENCORE VIDEOS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-12-04
Citations: 352 F.3d 938
Docket Number: No. 00-51119
Parties: ENCORE VIDEOS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges, and CUMMINGS, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 352
Pages: 938–939

Head Matter:
ENCORE VIDEOS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 00-51119.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 4, 2003.
Arthur Myron Schwartz, Michael W. Gross (argued), Schwartz & Goldberg, Denver, CO, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Donald S. Bayne (argued), Michael P. Hodge, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.
Doreen Eva McGookey and James Bick-ford Pinson, Asst. City Attys., Dallas, TX, for City of Dallas, Amicus Curiae.
G. Randall Garrou, Weston, Garrou & DeWitt, Los Angeles, CA, for FTU, Inc., DAJO, Inc., Ice Embassy, Inc. and Texas Richmond Corp., Amici Curiae.
Beatrice A. Mladenka-Fowler, Mladen-ka-Fowler & Associates, Houston, TX, for City of Houston, Amicus Curiae.
Before SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges, and CUMMINGS, District Judge.
District Judge of the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
BY THE COURT:
We clarify our opinion, 330 F.3d 288, by stating the following: The opinion does not overrule SDJ, Inc. v. City of Houston, 837 F.2d 1268 (5th Cir.1988). Indeed, no panel has the power to overrule the opinion of a previous panel. Patterson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 335 F.3d 476, 485 (5th Cir.2003). In addition, the ordinance at issue was found not to be narrowly tailored because of both its failure to make an on-site/off-site distinction and its low 20% inventory requirement.