It supports the claim that it was a settlement, rather than the judge letting them off the hook unilaterally. As part of any settlement, each side agrees not to engage in further litigation on the same matter, otherwise there's no point in settling. I also omitted the next sentence which states what they gave in exchange for the settlement.

>In return, they have agreed to pay roughly $4.3 billion, while also forfeiting ownership of Purdue Pharma.