Specifically, the plaintiff, a female student, alleged that she was sexually harassed by a male student and that the university was deliberately indifferent to her claims of harassment. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately ruled against the plaintiff, finding that the university's response to her complaints was not deliberately indifferent. The court emphasized that the university's actions needed to be clearly unreasonable in light of known circumstances to constitute deliberate indifference. Simply failing to take the most effective action possible wasn't sufficient to establish liability. This case helped to shape the understanding of what constitutes "deliberate indifference" under Title IX in the context of peer-on-peer harassment.