The Postum Cereal Company v. California Fig Nut Company case in 1926 revolved around a dispute over trademark infringement and unfair competition. The Postum Cereal Company, known for its product "Instant Postum," sued the California Fig Nut Company for selling a similar beverage under the name "Fig-Nut Coffee." They claimed that this was an attempt to deceive customers into thinking they were buying Instant Postum, thus infriving on their trademark rights. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that there was no evidence of intent to deceive or cause confusion among consumers by the defendant's use of its chosen name. Furthermore, it found that 'Postum' and 'Fig-Nut' were not sufficiently alike as to likely cause confusion or mistake in the mind of public nor did it constitute unfair competition.

In the dissenting opinion for the case between Postum Cereal Company and California Fig Nut Company, it was argued that there should be no infringement found. The dissenting justices believed that while both companies used similar methods to produce their products, this did not constitute an infringement of trade secrets or unfair competition. They contended that the processes were common knowledge in the industry and thus could not be considered proprietary information exclusive to one company. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority's view about customer confusion due to packaging similarities; arguing instead that consumers are generally discerning enough to differentiate between different brands based on more than just package design. Therefore, they concluded that California Fig Nut Company had not engaged in any illegal activities warranting legal action from Postum Cereal Company.