In Re: Retractable Technologies, Inc. v. the State of Texas

DENIED and Opinion Filed June 12, 2023
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-23-00550-CV
IN RE RETRACTABLE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Relator
Original Proceeding from the 44th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-17946
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Reichek, Smith, and Kennedy
Opinion by Justice Smith
Before the Court is relator’s June 2, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus
wherein relator seeks relief from a trial court order making certain pre-trial
determinations of law.
Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court
clearly abused its discretion and that relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In
re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.
proceeding). Relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record
to show it is entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992)
(orig. proceeding).
Relator’s record does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. The documents contained in relator’s record are neither certified nor
sworn copies. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1). Certified copies may be
ordered from the appropriate court clerk. See In re Hamilton, No. 05-19-01458-CV,
2020 WL 64679, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 7, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem.
op.). Documents become sworn copies when they are attached to an affidavit or to
an unsworn declaration stating under penalty of perjury that the person making the
affidavit or unsworn declaration has personal knowledge that the copies of the
documents attached are correct copies of the originals. See id.; see also TEX. CIV.
PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 132.001. Relator included in its petition a certification
from its attorney that does not invoke the penalty of perjury stating that “the
documents contained in this Mandamus Record are true and correct copies filed in
their respective courts pursuant to 52.7(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure.” We conclude that the attorney’s certification is insufficient to make the
documents included in the record sworn copies. See In re La Energia Nortena, LLC,
No. 05-22-01272-CV, 2023 WL 3579442, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 22, 2023,
orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
Additionally, the order from which relator seeks mandamus relief refers to a
relevant hearing, but relator did not include a properly authenticated reporter’s
record of any relevant testimony or a statement that no testimony was adduced in
–2–
connection with the matter complained. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). Without a
sufficient record, relator has failed to carry its burden.
Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.
/Craig Smith/
CRAIG SMITH
JUSTICE
230550F.P05
–3–