On October 30, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review an appeals court decision that invalidated a drug patent on the ground that, when applying for the patent many years ago, the applicant failed to disclose to patent examiners all past relationships between the applicant and its expert witnesses. The order was a setback for WLF, which filed a brief urging that review be granted. WLF argued that the appeals court’s decision had the potential to undermine public confidence in the patent system. WLF urged the Court to grant review to make clear that a patent should not be struck down on “inequitable conduct” grounds except in extreme circumstances. WLF argued that omissions by a patent applicant should not be deemed sufficiently “material” to warrant invocation of the inequitable conduct defense unless the defendant demonstrates that there is a reasonable likelihood that the patent would not have been issued had there been no omission — a standard that was not met here.