It has long been established that where a defendant with notice in an injunction proceeding completes the acts sought to be enjoined the court may by mandatory injunction restore the status quo

If unraveling the transfer is necessary after the district court decides the merits, it will be within the court's power to do so.

And it also had the power in a suit by the Administrator to restrain state court eviction proceedings brought by the landlord against a tenant.

That does not, however, mean that if a district court denies a preliminary injunction based on a misreading of the law, courts are without the ability subsequently to rectify that error.

—pre-FLPMA land exchange two days after the district court granted summary judgment in their favor, we denied defendants' contention that the legality of the transfers was beyond the jurisdiction of this court:[A] fter a defendant has been notified of the pendency of a suit seeking an injunction against him, even though a temporary injunction be not granted, he acts at his …

We agree for the reasons set forth in Ramsburg that consummation of a merger during the pendency of an appeal, as here, does not render the appeal moot and that where the circumstances equitably call for such action the court may order the merger undone.