proprietary, or a trade secret. The district court denied Zee Medical’s motion and this appeal followed. III. Discussion A Amount in Controversy As a preliminary matter, Miller and FA2000 argue that the district court did not have jurisdiction over this lawsuit because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. They base this argument solely on their assertion that at the time of the preliminary injunction hearing, they presented uncontested evidence that the total sales to former Zee Medical customers totaled only $7,000, with the net prof hat the district court applied an incorrect standard, we conclude that the denial of Zee Medical’s motion for preliminary injunction was proper. See SCFC ILC, Inc. v. Visa USA Inc., 936 F.2d 1096, 1100 (10th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Pursuant to Colorado law, a covenant not to
holding that a hearing must be held to determine credibility in preliminary injunction cases holding that when the district court applies the wrong preliminary injunction standard this court may review the record to determine whether the injunction is justified holding that court can consider inadmissible evidence in the context of a motion for preliminary injunction holding that where a district courts preliminary injunction preventing the appellant from terminating its agreement with the defendant had expired the appellants appeal of the district courts decision to grant that injunction was moot holding that plaintiffs were not entitled to a preliminary injunction