Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): a dispute with respect to a material fact and such dispute does not prevent the entry of summary judgment.” O’Connor, 382 Md. at 111, 854 A.2d at 1196 (quoting Lippert v. Jung, 366 Md. 221, 227, 783 A.2d 206, 209 (2001)). In other words, a material fact is a fact “necessary to resolve the controversy as a matter of law[.]” Lynx, Inc. v. Ordnance Products, Inc., 273 Md. 1, 8, 327 A.2d 502, 509 (1974). If it is determined that no genuine dispute of material fact exists, “we review the trial court’s ruling on the law, considering the same material from the record and deciding the same legal issues as the circuit court.” Messing, 373 Md. at 684, 821 A.2d at 28 (citation omitted); Anderson v. Council of Unit Owners of the Gables on Tuckerman Condo., 404 Md. 560, 571, 948 A.2d 11, 18 (2008) (<HOLDING>). In conducting our review of a grant of a 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if there is a genuine dispute about a material fact (B) holding that if no material facts are placed in dispute this court must determine whether the circuit court correctly entered summary judgment as a matter of law citations omitted (C) holding summary judgment was not warranted because material facts were in dispute (D) holding that claim construction is a matter of law for the court to determine (E) holding that this court may affirm a grant of summary judgment on any ground appearing in the record regardless of whether the circuit court relied on it
Output (English): holding summary judgment was not warranted because material facts were in dispute