Specifically, this Article examines whether settlement agreements and consent decrees resulting from what would otherwise be immunized litigation are protected from antitrust scrutiny and liability under Noerr. In order to conduct this analysis, this Article develops a methodology for determining immunity by focusing the immunity examination upon the means used to petition government and the source of the alleged injuries. Ultimately, private conduct is immune from antitrust scrutiny when it represents a valid attempt to persuade an independent governmental decision-maker in an effort to solicit government action, and the alleged injuries result from that persuasive effort. The validity of any effort depends upon the forum in which the petitioning is conducted without reference to antitrust. By focusing upon the means used to petition government, this analysis ensures that Noerr immunity protects the people's right to petition their government for the redress of grievances without unnecessarily limiting the protection afforded by the antitrust laws.



Publication Date


Document Type


Place of Original Publication

Indiana Law Review

Publication Information

33 Indiana Law Review 385 (2000)


COinS Raymond Shih Ray Ku Faculty Bio