On November 7, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order declining to review an appeals court decision that requires exacting antitrust scrutiny for virtually any agreement between a brand-name drug company and a generic drug company to settle patent-infringement litigation. The decision was a setback for WLF, which filed a brief urging review. WLF argued that the decision expands antitrust liability dramatically and makes it almost impossible for litigants to settle drug-patent disputes. The Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that a patent litigation settlement that includes a large cash payment to a generic drug company calls for antitrust scrutiny because it may indicate that the brand-name company is unreasonably restraining trade by paying a competitor to stay out of the market. The appeals court expanded that holding to cover any non-cash benefit (here an exclusive patent license) paid to the generic company. WLF’s brief was joined by the Allied Educational Foundation.