In 2007, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), changed not just antitrust parallel conduct claims but the entire landscape for complaints at the pleading stage. Though the case is known to be of great importance, it has also been known to be confusing and fraught with contradictions, causing great uncertainty for assessing the adequacy of a pleading. Given the importance of Twombly for pleadings and antitrust jurisprudence, the Supreme Court should clarify the issues arising out of the decision for the benefit of the lower courts that have struggled with its interpretation and for the benefit of the claimants to determine the requisite level of detail to withstand a motion to dismiss.