In Pilgrim’s Pride Corp. v. Agerton et al., Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a $25 million judgment against Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., holding that the chicken producer did not violate the U.S. antitrust laws when it decided to shut down its Arkansas plant in order to increase poultry prices. In 2011, Texas federal judge found Pilgrim’s Pride liable under the Packers and Stockyards Act, and issued the $25 million fine against it. In overturning the lower court’s decision, the Fifth Circuit held that Pilgrim’s Pride’s decision to shut down its Arkansas facility was a legitimate response of a rational market participant to changes in the dynamic market. Pilgrim’s Pride was producing more chicken than the market demanded, so it “wisely” chose to scale back production to try to increase prices on poultry by reducing demand, and save its business, according to the court. This unilateral attempt to raise prices, by itself, is not a violation of the law, the ruling said.