## Facts

- The U.S. Forest Service approved a logging project covering several thousand acres in a Wisconsin national forest and planned to issue a permit to the high bidder.
- Habitat Education Center, a nonprofit environmental organization, sued for judicial review of the approval and sought a preliminary injunction to stop issuance of the logging permit.
- The district court granted a preliminary injunction but required Habitat to post a $10,000 bond under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c).
- Habitat sought reconsideration, arguing a nonprofit environmental plaintiff should not be required to post security; the court refused to alter the bond requirement.
- Habitat posted the bond, and the case proceeded to summary judgment.
- The district court entered summary judgment for the Forest Service and dissolved the preliminary injunction.
- On appeal, Habitat did not challenge the merits judgment; it appealed only the order requiring the $10,000 injunction bond.

## Issues

1. After final judgment, may an appellant obtain review of an earlier order requiring an injunction bond, even though such an order is generally not immediately appealable when entered?
2. Did the district court abuse its discretion under Rule 65(c) by requiring a nonprofit environmental organization to post a $10,000 injunction bond?

## Decision

- The court held it had jurisdiction to review the bond order on appeal from the final judgment because the bond order merged into the final judgment.
- The court affirmed the bond requirement, holding Rule 65(c) contains no exemption for nonprofit or public-interest plaintiffs.
- The court concluded the $10,000 bond was not so high as to functionally deny preliminary injunctive relief, particularly because Habitat was able to post it.
- The district court’s order requiring the injunction bond was affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- An order requiring an injunction bond under Rule 65(c) is generally not immediately appealable; review ordinarily occurs after final judgment as part of the merged judgment.
- Immediate appeal may be possible only where the bond is set so high that compliance is impossible and the order effectively denies preliminary relief.
- Rule 65(c) generally conditions a preliminary injunction on the movant’s provision of security, with an express exception for federal agencies or officers; courts should not create categorical exemptions for nonprofit or environmental plaintiffs.
- District courts have discretion in setting bond amounts; setting security too low (or none) can cause irreparable prejudice because recovery for wrongful injunction is limited to the bond.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit held that a preliminary-injunction bond requirement is reviewable after final judgment and that Rule 65(c) permits requiring security from nonprofit environmental plaintiffs; the district court acted within its discretion in imposing a $10,000 bond.


Habitat Educ. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 607 F.3d 453 (7th Cir. 2010)