Dean v. U.S. Postal Serv.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that the standard mirrors that for granting a preliminary injunction
• “we have frequently said that trademark violations are irreparable, primarily because injuries to reputation and goodwill are nearly impossible to measure”
• “Because the legal issue does not have a clear-cut answer, we rest our decision on whether to grant the stay primarily on the balance of potential harms.”
• “As with a motion for a preliminary injunction, a ‘sliding scale’ approach applies; the greater the moving party’s likelihood of success on the merits, the less heavily the balance of harms must weigh in its favor, and vice versa.”
• the purpose of a stay is to “minimize the costs of error’
• first citing In re Forty-Eight Insulations, Inc., 115 F.3d 1294, 1300 (7th Cir. 1997), then citing Cavel Int’l, Inc. v. Madigan, 500 F.3d 544, 547–48 (7th Cir. 2007), and then citing Sofinet v. INS, 188 F.3d 703, 706 (7th Cir. 1999)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).