The "diagonal assembly system" was a production system pioneered by the automobile company Gogo. Recently, Gogo was able to sue a competitor and won the suit, thereby receiving $100 million in damages. Which of the following would most likely enable Gogo to win such a lawsuit?

the competitor infringed on Gogo's patent of the "diagonal assembly system."

Explanation:

Based on the scenario being described within the question it can be said that the most likely reason as to why they were able to win the suit would be that the competitor infringed on Gogo's patent of the "diagonal assembly system." Meaning that the competitor took the design that Gogo had created and used it for their own benefit which is completely illegal since it was created and patented by Gogo, therefore it is their property.

The competitor infringed on Gogo's patent of the "diagonal assembly system."

Explanation:

The Gogo's patent of the "diagonal assembly means that, the Gogo company has obtained the licence, that is, legally given the authority or sole right on the assembly which exclude or does not give right to others to make a copy or use it.

In this case, the Gogo company was able to sue and won the suit against the competitor because the competitor has violated the authority that given the Gogo company the sole right of the "diagonal assembly system". This could be either by making an unauthorized copy of the assembly or by making use of it without proper authorization.