dress remained on the market. Kidz-Med maintains that the district court clearly erred in finding that Tecnimed was still selling the Thermofocus in the United States, and that those sales would be diminished by Kidz-Med’s marketing of its competing thermometer. At the preliminary injunction hearing, Tecnimed introduced evidence that Ther-mofocus thermometers distributed by Kidz-Med in the purple/blue packaging were still available for purchase in the United States from online distributor's and brick-and-mortar retail shops. Although Kidz-Med put forward evidence indicating that those thermometers were no longer being sold, the district court was entitled to resolve this factual dispute in favor of Tecnimed. See Arch Ins. Co. v. Precision Stone, Inc., 584 F.3d 33, 39 (2d Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). Nor did the district court clearly err in
holding that an error cannot be plain unless it is clear under current law quotation omitted holding that on clear error review appellate court cannot secondguess the trial courts choice between permissible competing inferences internal quotation marks and ellipses omitted holding that apprendi error is harmless if the court finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the result would have been the same absent the error internal quotation marks and citation omitted recognizing that we review a trial courts jury instruc tions for abuse of discretion and that a district court abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law internal quotation marks omitted holding that due process is violated if evidence of prior bad acts goes only to character and there are no permissible inferences the jury may draw from it internal quotation marks omitted