Then I'm not sure what use is being suggested for the land patent. As far as I can tell, it's just a deed when the government is the grantor:

"land patent. An instrument by which the government conveys a grant of public land to a private person." Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004).

Sure, there were some federalism disputes back in the early days of the United States when the federal and state governments fought over which of them had the right to convey a certain parcel of land. Those are represented by the cites in this thread. The case I cited was the most recent one I found that dealt with an attempt to use a land patent in the context that is most often discussed in these forums: defeating foreclosure.

The bank's right to foreclose is usually founded in contract (most modern bank Notes and Mortgages contain clauses granting the bank a right to foreclose if you don't pay back what you owe), so in the most common case, holding a land patent up to try and defeat foreclosure is clearly an attempt to infringe the bank's right to contract.

You're right, the court does not invalidate or dispute the land patent as a supreme means of conveying land. But I don't think I've taken the case out of context at all. The defendant in the foreclosure tried to stop it by claiming it was protected by a land patent. The court deemed the argument bogus and gave the bank its summary judgment.