U.S. Supreme Court in the AT & T subsidiary in antitrust lawsuits that accused the company of anticompetitive practices phone pricing for his services to broadband Internet access.

The justices ruled unanimously in favor of AT & T Pacific Bell telephone subsidiary, who were accused of “price squeeze”, aimed at eliminating competition for DSL broadband services, Reuters reported Wednesday.

The plaintiffs in the case were competing Internet service providers, including communication and LinkLine Notelog, who buy high-speed Internet service from AT & T at wholesale prices and resell service to consumers. ISPs involved in competing directly with AT & T to provide DSL service.

In accordance with federal law, AT & T Pacific Bell (now doing business as AT & T California) services required to sell wholesale access to its telephone network. But the plaintiffs argued in their lawsuit that was filed in 2003 in federal court in California, that AT & T prices were too high. They contend that AT & T had inflated the price it charged them while it lowered the price of retail services for consumers, which effectively weaken the competition. The plaintiffs argued it was a “price squeeze.”

However, Chief Justice John Roberts did not agree. He wrote in a ruling that the “price squeeze” claim does not apply in this case.

“We refused the invitation, recognition of such claims. Two wrong no one claims that this right,” he wrote.

The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal of the United States in San Francisco. This decision was the latest in a series of recent Supreme Court decisions, which are usually difficult to bring antitrust suits, told Reuters.