In the case of Gates Iron Works v. Fraser in 1893, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving patent infringement. The plaintiff, Gates Iron Works, alleged that Fraser had infringed upon their patent for an improvement in ore-concentrators - machines used to separate valuable minerals from less valuable rock. The defendant argued that they did not infringe because their machine was based on a different principle and produced better results than the patented invention. However, after reviewing both designs carefully, it was determined by the court that despite some differences in construction and operation between two devices, they were essentially identical as per functionality and working principles which constituted infringement under law at that time. The court also noted that even if one device is more efficient or superior to another does not necessarily mean it's fundamentally different or non-infringing; rather what matters is whether essential elements of original design are copied without significant modifications or improvements. Therefore ruling favored Gates Iron Works stating Fraser’s product indeed violated its patent rights.

In the dissenting opinion for Gates Iron Works v. Fraser, it was argued that the majority misinterpreted the law and failed to consider important evidence. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant factual errors in the case record which should have been rectified before a decision was made. They also disagreed with how certain legal principles were applied by their colleagues, particularly those related to contract interpretation and patent infringement. Furthermore, they felt that some of these issues could have been avoided if more weight had been given to expert testimony during trial proceedings. In conclusion, while they acknowledged their colleagues' efforts towards reaching a fair verdict based on available information, they maintained that such an outcome would only be possible through further investigation into disputed facts and proper application of relevant laws.