The U.S. Supreme Court case Isador Straus et al., trading as R.H. Macy & Co., v. Notaseme Hosiery Company in 1915 revolved around a patent dispute between the two parties involved. The Notaseme Hosiery Company had patented a method of reinforcing the heels and toes of hosiery, which they claimed was being infringed upon by R.H Macy & Co., owned by Isador Straus and others. However, the court ruled in favor of R.H Macy & Co., stating that their method did not infringe on Notaseme's patent because it was fundamentally different from what had been patented by them earlier; hence no violation occurred.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Isador Straus et al., trading as R.H. Macy & Co., v. Notaseme Hosiery Company, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's ruling that a retailer could be held liable for patent infringement by selling products without knowing they were patented. He argued that it was unreasonable to expect retailers to investigate every product they sell for potential patent issues, especially when there is no clear way to determine if a product is patented or not. Furthermore, he contended that such an expectation would place an undue burden on commerce and potentially stifle innovation in retail markets due to fear of litigation over unknowingly selling patented goods.