The decision to file in state or federal court, or even whether to remove a case to federal court, can be outcome determinative. One would not necessarily expect that to be the case, and perhaps some statistical analysis would shed light on the issue. But we know that when it comes to injunctions, federal court may have a higher bar. See Total Liquor Controls v. Berg, (3d. Cir.).

The opinion is written by U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas, who with his unique writing style, as always, direct and to the point, in remanding the case to the district court to reconsider whether to issue an injunction. The decision is designated “nonprecedential” which under the Third Circuit operating procedures means it was primarily for the parties and not of institutional interest. It could also mean that the decision needed to be issued quickly without circulation to the judges to solicit comments as this was an interlocutory appeal from the denial of an injunction from the district court. Nevertheless, the opinion aids in the interpretation of the requirement of injunctions in federal court.