In the 1941 case Pecheur Lozenge Co., Inc. v. National Candy Co., Inc., the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over patent infringement related to candy manufacturing processes. The Pecheur Lozenge Company had patented a method for making lozenges and claimed that the National Candy Company was infringing on this patent in their own production process. However, upon review, it was determined that while both companies used similar methods involving sugar syrup and starch molds, there were significant differences in other aspects of their respective processes such as temperature control and drying techniques which made them distinct from each other. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of National Candy Company stating they did not infringe on Pecheur's patent because these differences meant that they were not using the exact same process as described by Pecheur’s patent claim.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Pecheur Lozenge Co., Inc. v. National Candy Co., Inc., argued that the majority's decision to uphold a ruling against Pecheur for trademark infringement was incorrect. The dissent contended that there were significant differences between the two companies' products, including their packaging and design, which would prevent any reasonable consumer from confusing them. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of what constitutes "unfair competition," arguing it should not be applied so broadly as to stifle legitimate business practices or innovation within an industry. They believed this overly broad application could potentially harm businesses and consumers alike by limiting choice and stifening competition in the marketplace.