In the case of Saranac Automatic Machine Corporation v. Wirebounds Patents Company et al., 1930, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a patent held by Wirebounds Patents Company had been infringed upon by Saranac Automatic Machine Corporation. The patent in question pertained to a machine for making wirebound boxes and its unique method of operation. The lower courts ruled in favor of Wirebounds, finding that Saranac's machines were infringing on their patented technology. However, upon appeal to the Supreme Court, it was determined that while there were similarities between the two machines' operations, they did not function identically nor produce identical results; therefore no infringement had occurred. This decision reversed those made by lower courts and set an important precedent regarding how closely one product or process must resemble another before it is considered an infringement on existing patents.

In the dissenting opinion for Saranac Automatic Machine Corporation v. Wirebounds Patents Company, the justice argued that there was no infringement of patent rights by Saranac. The main point of contention was whether or not a specific machine used in manufacturing boxes infringed upon an existing patent held by Wirebounds Patents Company. The majority ruled that it did, but the dissenting justice disagreed on this interpretation of patent law and its application to this case. They believed that while similar in function, Saranac's machine had significant differences from the patented one which should exempt it from being considered as infringing upon Wirebound's patents. Furthermore, they contended that any similarities were due to common industry practices rather than copying or stealing intellectual property rights.