Teacher:In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? Solve this instance: (D.P.R.2006) ("The motion as to preliminary injunction is DENIED as the Court considers that the preliminary in-junctive relief in this case, being one to determine likelihood of success and there being no 'smoking gun' evidence, precludes the Court, at this stage, from deciding issues of credibility, weighing of evidence, and issues of motive and intent in order to determine the required injunctive criterion of 'likelihood of success.' The Court is of the opinion that the described issues are outcome determinative to be made by the jury."); Franklin v. Ciroli, 865 F.Supp. 940, 947 (D.Mass. 1994) (Tauro, J.) (citing Spencer Co., 489 F.2d at 707); Data Gen. Corp. v. Grumman Sys. Support Corp., 1988 WL 159936, *4, No. 88-0033-S, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16427, at *11 (D.Mass. Dec. 29, 1988) (<HOLDING>). See also Waldmann Lighting Co. v. Halogen
Holding statements: (A) recognizing that the district court is not bound by its prior factual findings determined in a preliminary injunction hearing (B) holding preliminary injunction improper where it exceeded the relief sought and granted the same relief which would have been given in a final order of permanent injunction (C) holding that plaintiffs were not entitled to a preliminary injunction (D) holding that a hearing must be held to determine credibility in preliminary injunction cases (E) recognizing the inappropriateness of a preliminary injunction where credibility determinations must be made but granting a preliminary injunction because the legal and factual issues have been sufficiently illuminated
Student:
recognizing that the district court is not bound by its prior factual findings determined in a preliminary injunction hearing