Back in April, I incorrectly surmised that Cooley and the ABA had reached a settlement in their lawsuit. How else to explain the ABA's decision to find Cooley back in compliance with Standard 501(b)? (For more on that harebrained decision, see here.) Well, this time there is some actual evidence (not just my conjecture) that the two sides may be nearing a settlement. Earlier today, the Judge assigned to the case referred the matter to a Federal Magistrate for the purpose of holding a settlement conference. (See order here.) there were two things that Cooley really cared about in this lawsuit - being found back in compliance with 501(b) and getting permission ("acquiescence" in ABA parlance) to open a branch of the law school at Western Michigan's home campus in Kalamazoo. This "major change" is to be considered at the Accreditation Committee's next meeting on June 28, 2018. Assuming this decision goes Cooley's way, Cooley will have got both of the things that they wanted. By settling, the ABA can avoid awkward litigation over its seemingly arbitrary enforcement of Standard 501(b), and avoid the risk of litigating similar issues in multiple jurisdictions, with the potential that a negative ruling in the Cooley case could aid the cause of one of the InfiLaw law schools in that ongoing litigation.