How did the Third Circuit Court of Appeals rule in the Conestoga Wood Specialties case?

In the case of Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation v. Sebelius, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that for-profit, secular corporations are not capable of engaging in religious exercise for the purposes of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act or the free-exercise clause of the First Amendment.1

This decision stood in contrast to the ruling by the Tenth Circuit in the Hobby Lobby case, which had concluded that such corporations could be considered "persons" capable of exercising religion. These conflicting rulings led the U.S. Supreme Court to consolidate the two cases into Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. to resolve the legal disagreement.1