United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D In the August 31, 2004 United States Court of Appeals Charles R. Fulbruge III for the Fifth Circuit Clerk ___________________ m 03-41613 _________________

SYLVESTER MCCLAIN, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; BUFORD THOMAS, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; PATRICK ROSS, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; MARY THOMAS, ON HER OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; EDDIE K. MASK, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; LEROY GARNER, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; SHERRY CALLOWAY SWINT, ON HER OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; JOHN DOE, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; FLORINE THOMPSON, ON HER OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; JOHN DOE, III, ALSO KNOWN AS “C,” ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; CLIFFORD R. DUIRDEN, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; EARL POTTS, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; RONALD MARK, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS; PLAINTIFF CLASS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, VERSUS LUFKIN INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant-Appellee, VERSUS GLASS, MOLDERS, POTTERY, PLASTICS & ALLIED WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL NO. 429, AFL-CIO/CLC; INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, LOCAL LODGE NO. 1999, AFL-CIO/CLC; INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS, IRON SHIP BUILDERS, BLACKSMITHS, FORGERS & HELPERS, LOCAL NO. 587, AFL-CIO/CLC, Movants-Appellants.

___________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas m 9:97-CV-63 ___________________

Before KING, Chief Judge, SMITH and reversible error, we AFFIRM, essentially for EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. the reasons given by the district court.

PER CURIAM.* The union appeals the denial of its motion to intervene. We have reviewed the briefs and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the oral argument s of counsel. Finding no * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has de- termined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circum- stances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.