Beleaguered seafood chain Red Lobster is seeking a buyer as it looks to avoid filing for bankruptcy.

The company has considered filing for bankruptcy to help it restructure its debt and get out of a number of costly and lengthy leases, but it’s also sought a buyer in recent months, people familiar with the matter told CNBC.

At least one firm had been interested in buying the chain, but a deal never came to fruition.

It’s unclear how the chain will ultimately resolve its financial woes. Red Lobster could secure a buyer, it could declare bankruptcy or its lenders could take control of the company.

Even if Red Lobster finds a buyer, it would be hard for it to avoid filing for Chapter 11 as it is trying to get out of many leases and those contracts can be difficult to break outside of bankruptcy, the people said.  Bloomberg first reported that Red Lobster was mulling a Chapter 11 filing last week. 

For the past decade amidst ownership changes, Red Lobster has taken on debt and entered into a number of long-term leases across its 700-plus locations, which have weighed on its balance sheet.

The broader casual-dining segment has struggled for roughly two decades in competition with fast-casual chains like Panera Bread and Chipotle Mexican Grill. The pandemic exacerbated the issue, particularly hurting full-service restaurants like Red Lobster.

The seafood chain has also struggled from some self-inflicted wounds, most notably its disastrous “endless shrimp” promotion. Last year, it changed the offer from once a week to daily to boost slower sales in the second half of the year.

But the offer juiced business too much as diners sought cheap deals, pressuring Red Lobster’s bottom line. As a result, Red Lobster reported $11 million in losses in the fiscal third quarter and $12.5 million in losses the following quarter.

The Supreme Court cleared the way on Thursday for a $2.4 billion plan to settle sex abuse lawsuits against the Boy Scouts of America to go forward. The court’s brief, unsigned order gave no reasons, which is typical for emergency applications. There were no public dissents.

The Boy Scouts settlement involves more than 82,000 claims of childhood sexual abuse, with more than 86 percent of victims in the case backing the deal.

However, the group who asked the Supreme Court to intervene objected to the use of the mechanism, which protected from liability third parties like churches involved in scouting, local councils and insurers.

The outcome in the Boy Scouts case had been closely watched as a possible clue of where the justices might lean in the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy settlement. During oral arguments in December, the justices appeared divided, and a decision in that case is expected by the end of the court’s term, likely in late June.

The victims’ group, in asking the court to step in, argued that if the settlement were allowed to proceed, sexual abuse victims “will lose their right to pursue their claims independently of the bankruptcy settlement trust.”

The Boy Scouts had argued that the settlement should continue as planned, warning that if the justices blocked the deal, it would “threaten to throw the scouting program into chaos.”

The challengers represented “a tiny fraction” of the victims involved in the deal, the Boy Scouts said.

After Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. temporarily paused the settlement earlier this month, the bankruptcy judge overseeing the case suspended work on the deal, which has already paid about $8 million to several thousand victims.

On Thursday, after the court announced its decision, the trust handling the settlement said it had “resumed all operations, including processing and paying claims.”