In Aero Fulfillment Services, Inc. v. Tartar, 1st Dist. No. C-060071, 2007 Ohio 174, the First District Court of Appeals distinguished Stoneham and affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction in a covenant not to compete case based upon lack of irreparable harm to the employer if the injunction were denied. One distinguishing factor identified by the court in Aero was the existence of a different level of risk of irreparable harm faced where the former employee's knowledge was product related (as in Stoneham) as opposed to knowledge of the service industry (Aero). Id. at P 30. The Aero work involved a covenant not to compete in the fulfillment industry -- database services, digital services, internet services, mail processing, and telemarketing. The court also recognized that marketing information in the case was time sensitive and became stale quickly. Id. at P 31-32.