On September 24, 2012, WLF filed a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to review (and ultimately overturn) an appeals court decision holding that routine agreements to settle patent disputes can violate the antitrust laws. WLF argued that parties ought to be encouraged to settle such disputes. By raising the possibility that settlements will routinely be challenged under the antitrust laws, the courts are unnecessarily discouraging settlement, WLF argued. One defendant (the owner of a drug patent) sued another defendant, alleging that the second defendant’s plan to sell a generic version of the drug would infringe its patent. The defendants eventually settled the patent dispute, with the patentee agreeing to pay money to the generic company, which in turn agreed to delay marketing its generic drug. WLF argued that the settlement did not violate antitrust laws because the agreement permitted the generic company to market its product before the patent was set to expire.

Awaiting decision.