Opinion ID: 2765395
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Irreparable Harm, Equities, & Public Interest

Text: The district court also addressed the other three Winter elements: likelihood of irreparable harm, balance of the equities, and the public interest. The court found that these elements, too, weighed against the issuance of an injunction based, in significant part, on its conclusion that Pom Wonderful is unlikely to establish a likelihood of consumer POM WONDERFUL V. HUBBARD 25 confusion. Because the district court’s erroneous likelihoodof-confusion determination clearly influenced its rulings on the remaining Winter elements, we cannot determine on this record how the district court would have ruled on these Winter elements had it correctly found that Pom Wonderful is likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim. Accordingly, we remand this case to the district court with instructions that it reconsider the final three Winter elements in light of our holding that Pom Wonderful is likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim. When evaluating the likelihood-of-irreparable-harm element, the district court should consider Herb Reed Enterprises, LLC v. Florida Entertainment Management, Inc., 736 F.3d 1239, 1249, 1250–51 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding that a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction in a trademark infringement case must establish a likelihood of irreparable harm that is grounded in evidence, not in conclusory or speculative allegations of harm), cert denied, 135 S. Ct. 57 (2014), and allow the parties to submit any additional evidence that the district court deems appropriate.