Once an initial test read positive for bumetanide, the other samples were tested to confirm the presence of the diuretic.The appeals court ruled that since the purpose of those confirmatory tests was solely to detect the presence of bumetanide which state law doesn't define as a drug there is no legal basis for the court to find that the NFL violated the state's notification requirements."Accordingly, although we do not agree with the district court's interpretation of (state law), we nevertheless affirm its order denying injunctive relief," the appeals court ruled.The appeals court said that if the initial screening and subsequent tests had been positive for anabolic steroids which are defined as a drug by the state the NFL would have been subject to reporting requirements.Ginsberg, the Williamses attorney, said the court ruled the NFL has to follow the law, but since it was testing for bumetanide, the restrictions of the law don't apply to his clients."The NFL has