On February 20, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a lower-court decision that imposed substantial antitrust liability on a large company for engaging in “predatory buying” (i.e., buying supplies at too high a price), even though the uncontested evidence demonstrated that the company at all times sold its products at prices that exceeded its costs. The decision was a victory for WLF, which filed a brief urging that the award be overturned. The Court agreed with WLF that in order to prevail, a plaintiff alleging “predatory buying” must at a minimum demonstrate that the defendant was selling its product at a below-cost price. WLF argued that consumers, as well as the economy as a whole, benefit when companies bid up the prices of goods they seek and that companies should not be punished for engaging in buying competition that is good for consumers.