In the case of The Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Circuit does not have jurisdiction to review cases in which patent law is raised for the first time on appeal. This decision came about after a dispute between two companies over trade dress infringement claims related to fan designs. Initially, Vornado sued Holmes for patent infringement and lost; however, it appealed claiming that there was also an issue of patent-law counterclaims involved in their initial suit against Holmes - something they had not brought up during trial court proceedings but were now using as grounds for appeal at federal level. The Supreme Court disagreed with this approach and held that raising new issues on appeal did not give them jurisdiction over such matters.

In the dissenting opinion for THE HOLMES GROUP, INC. v. VORNADO AIR CIRCULATION SYSTEMS, INC., Justice Ginsburg argued that the majority's interpretation of jurisdictional rules was too narrow and would lead to unnecessary complexity in patent litigation cases. She contended that a counterclaim raising a federal question should be sufficient to establish federal jurisdiction, even if it is not included in the plaintiff’s original complaint. This approach would promote judicial efficiency by allowing all related claims to be heard together in one court rather than splitting them between state and federal courts based on whether they were raised as claims or counterclaims. Furthermore, she pointed out that this interpretation aligns with Congress' intent when drafting legislation governing patent disputes.