In the Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc. et al v. Linde Air Products Co case of 1948, the U.S Supreme Court addressed issues related to patent infringement and doctrine of equivalents, a legal rule in most patent systems that allows a court to hold a party liable for patent infringement even though the infringing device or process does not fall within the literal scope of a patent claim but is equivalent to it. The plaintiff, Linde Air Products Company claimed that Graver Tank & Manufacturing Company had infringed on its patented welding composition by producing an almost identical product with only minor changes in ingredients used. The court ruled in favor of Linde stating that despite slight differences between both products they were essentially performing same function which constituted as an infringement under Doctrine of Equivalents principle.

In the dissenting opinion for Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Linde Air Products Co., Justice Jackson expressed concern over the majority's broad interpretation of patent infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, arguing that it could stifle innovation and competition in industry. He contended that such a wide application would allow patent holders to claim rights beyond what was specified in their patents, thereby discouraging others from developing new or improved products within similar fields out of fear they might infringe upon these expanded claims. Furthermore, he criticized the court's reliance on expert testimony to determine equivalence rather than focusing on factual evidence presented during trial proceedings.