It appears that Ashley and Ethan Allen’s requests to receive a portion of the antidumping duties they have fought for over the past seven years may be over.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied both companies’ petition for certiorari, which means it will not hear the case.

The companies argued that as domestic producers they should receive a portion of the duties, even though they did not lend support to a 2003 petition seeking an investigation into the pricing tactics of Chinese bedroom manufacturers. Both Ashley and Ethan Allen challenged this provision of the Byrd Amendment, saying that requiring them to support the petition was a violation of their free speech.

By some estimates, the amount that the companies disputed amounts to more than $100 million, although an exact figure was not available.

This petition ultimately led to a government investigation that determined the Chinese companies were dumping furniture onto the U.S. market, a violation of international trade laws.

As a result, the government imposed duties on Chinese producers that aimed to help level the playing field for domestic producers the government had determined were injured by these unfairly priced imports. The duties are levied on producers, but paid to importers of record.

Standard Furniture has also asked the Supreme Court to hear the case. However, Kristin Mowry, a partner in Mowry Grimson, the Washington law firm representing the three companies, said the firm doesn’t expect Standard’s case to be treated any differently.

“We still believe application of the Byrd amendment amounts to unlawful government viewpoint discrimination against our clients,” the firm said in a statement. “We are disappointed in the outcome, but the Court has made its final decision.”