A Texas judge today lifted a temporary restraining order he had issued earlier this week against TransCanada Corp., allowing the company to continue construction of the Keystone XL pipeline's southern leg across a parcel of private property in the state.

The decision from Nacogdoches County Court at Law Judge Jack Sinz dissolves a temporary restraining order he issued earlier this week in response to a lawsuit from landowner Michael Bishop, who said TransCanada misled him about the pipeline's contents. A hearing is scheduled for Wednesday (Greenwire, Dec. 11).

In a statement, TransCanada spokesman Shawn Howard said the company was pleased with the decision and "has been open, honest and transparent ... at all times" with Bishop, who signed an easement agreement with the company three weeks ago authorizing construction of the pipeline across his property.

Bishop vowed to keep fighting the pipeline.

"TransCanada executives may be smirking over Judge Sinz's ruling today, but they've got another thing coming if they think I'll just roll over for its dirty pipeline," he said in a statement released this afternoon by Tar Sands Blockade, an activist group fighting the pipeline. "I didn't pick this fight, but I refuse to sit idly by while a multinational corporation tramples my rights and that of other landowners all along Keystone XL's path in the name of deepening its profits."

Bishop has said he was misled about the pipeline's contents. If a northern leg wins approval from President Obama, the pipeline will carry diluted bitumen from Alberta's oil sands to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico coast. He argues that the product -- known as dilbit -- does not meet the legal definition of crude oil as outlined in Texas law and that he was told the pipeline would carry only crude.

Howard said TransCanada has complied with all applicable laws and dismissed the distinction between dilbit and traditional crude. TransCanada also says the pipeline remains on track to be complete by the end of next year.

"Since Mr. Bishop signed his agreement with TransCanada, nothing about the pipeline or the product it will carry has changed," Howard said. "While professional activists and others have made the same claims Mr. Bishop did today, oil is oil."

Activists maintain there is a difference between dilbit and crude that should be considered by the court.

TransCanada "will do anything to avoid facing a court challenge that would prove once and for all that dilbit is not crude," said Chris Wilson, a consultant with the Texas chapter of Public Citizen who is working with Keystone opponents.

"Dilbit has different chemical, physical, toxicological and biological impact properties from crude," she added in an email this afternoon. "Dilbit has to be converted to Syncrude before it can undergo distillation and refining to produce products. Crude does not."