In the case of Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Company v. Consolidated Safety Valve Company, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1891 dealt with a patent dispute between two companies over safety valves for steam boilers. The plaintiff, Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co., claimed that Consolidated Safety Valve Co. had infringed on their patented design and sought an injunction to prevent further production and sales by the defendant company. However, after examining both designs closely, it was determined that there were significant differences between them; thus they did not infringe upon each other's patents as alleged by Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co.. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of Consolidated Safety Valve Company stating that no infringement had occurred.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Company v. Consolidated Safety Valve Company argued that the patent held by Consolidated was not infringed upon by Crosby's product. The justice emphasized that while both products served a similar function, they achieved this through different mechanisms and designs, which should be considered when determining infringement. Furthermore, it was pointed out that if patents were to be interpreted so broadly as to encompass all devices serving a similar purpose regardless of their design or mechanism, then innovation would be stifled rather than encouraged - contrary to the intent behind patent laws. Therefore, according to this view, Crosby should have been allowed to continue manufacturing its unique safety valve without being accused of infringing on Consolidated's patent rights.