We have previously reported on cases addressing cy pres relief, in which some or all of the benefits of a class action are paid to a charity or other organization designed to serve the interests of the class. The United States Supreme Court recently denied a petition for writ of certiorari in the Facebook Beacon class action, Marek v. Lane, No. 13-136 (U.S. Nov. 4, 2013). Chief Justice Roberts wrote separately regarding the denial of certiorari. After describing the case and some of the unusual aspects of its cy pres relief, the Chief Justice stated it was appropriate to deny the petition because the case “might not have afforded the Court an opportunity to address more fundamental concerns” regarding the cy pres remedy. “In a suitable case, this Court may need to clarify the limits on the use of such remedies.” The “fundamental concerns” the Court might need to address include “when, if ever,” cy pres relief may be considered; “how to assess its fairness”; whether a newly formed entity can receive cy pres relief; if not, how entities should be selected; the “roles of the judge and parties” in shaping the remedy; and “how closely the goals of any enlisted entity must correspond to the interests of the class.” Inasmuch as these issues have been addressed in recent decisions of the courts of appeals, the Supreme Court may be signaling its interest in reviewing cy pres relief.