In the case of Sanitary Refrigerator Company v. Winters et al., 1929, the Supreme Court dealt with a patent dispute. The Sanitary Refrigerator Company claimed that Winters and his associates had infringed on their patented refrigerator design by producing similar models without permission or licensing. However, after examining the evidence, it was found that there were significant differences between the two designs in question which made them distinct from each other. Additionally, it was determined that some aspects of Sanitary's design were not original but rather common features seen in many refrigerators at that time period; therefore they could not be protected under patent law as unique inventions or innovations belonging to one company alone. As such, no infringement had occurred according to legal standards for patents and intellectual property rights protection.

The dissenting opinion in the Sanitary Refrigerator Company v. Winters case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling, which found that Sanitary Refrigerator Company had infringed upon patents held by Winters et al., was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant differences between the patented designs and those used by Sanitary Refrigerator Company, enough so as not to constitute infringement. They also disagreed with how the majority interpreted certain patent claims, arguing for a narrower interpretation of what constituted an infringing design or process under patent law. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on innovation and competition if such broad interpretations of patent rights were upheld.