The Ex Parte Bakelite Corporation case in 1928 involved the Bakelite Corporation's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging a decision by the United States Tariff Commission. The corporation argued that it was not given an opportunity for a hearing before an adverse ruling was made against them, violating their due process rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. However, this argument was rejected by the court which held that since Congress had granted authority to executive agencies such as tariff commissions and these bodies were acting within their legislative capacity when making rulings or decisions affecting trade policy, they did not need to provide opportunities for judicial-style hearings. This meant that administrative actions taken by such bodies did not necessarily have to comply with traditional legal procedures unless specifically required by law.

In the dissenting opinion for Ex parte Bakelite Corporation, Justice Harlan Fiske Stone argued that the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals should not have jurisdiction over patent validity cases. He contended that Congress did not intend to grant such power when it established this court. Instead, he believed its role was limited to reviewing decisions made by customs officials on tariff classifications and rates. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential conflicts between rulings from different courts if they both had authority over patent issues. This could lead to confusion and inconsistency in law enforcement which would undermine public confidence in the judicial system as a whole.