Deborah McDonald appeals the district court’s denial of her pre-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law. In addition, she requests that we order the district court to grant an injunction prohibiting Alpen House Limited, Corp., from future violations of the EPA’s record-keeping requirements, 29 U.S.C. § 211(c); 29 C.F.R. § 1620.32(b).

At the close of all the evidence, McDonald moved the court to grant her judgment as a matter of law. She failed to renew the motion, however, after the jury returned its verdict.

In the absence of a post-verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b), an “appellate court is without power to direct the District Court to enter judgment contrary to the one it had permitted to stand.” Unitherm Food Sys. v. SwiftEckrich, Inc., - U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 980, 985-86, 163 L.Ed.2d 974 (2006) (internal quotes omitted). Because McDonald failed to renew her motion, we lack authority to review the motion now.

McDonald asks us to order the district court to grant an injunction prohibiting Adena from violating the record-keeping provisions of the EPA, as embodied in 29 U.S.C. § 211(c) and 29 C.F.R. § 1620.32(b). She did not ask the district court to enter such injunction; hence, we refuse to consider her request now. “[A]n issue not raised in the district court and raised for the first time in an appeal will not be considered by this court.” Access Now, Inc. v. Southwest Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir. 2004) (internal quotes and citations omitted).

AFFIRMED.