⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Real court arguments, crisp audio, with context.

Court recordings can be difficult to follow, and many suffer from poor audio quality. This podcast enhances the audio, provides a brief introduction to each case, and explains legal concepts that may be unfamiliar to some listeners.

We hope these enhancements make oral argument recordings easier to understand, more accessible, and more enjoyable to listen to.

Apple Podcasts Spotify YouTube /feed.xml Open RSS Status

In Re Gonthier — Fed. Cir. (Oct 5, 2026)

No. 25-1477 Argued October 5, 2026 Published October 8, 2026

The Federal Circuit hears a patent appeal about protecting a buyer's bank information during an online payment. The application describes a transaction system that accesses the buyer's bank account, arranges payment to the seller, and sends confirmation without giving the seller the buyer's banking information. After the Patent Office rejected the application, the applicants sought review by its Patent Trial and Appeal Board and then appealed to this court. De novo means the court considers an issue anew. Section one-oh-one addresses patent eligibility: merely carrying out an abstract idea on an ordinary computer does not make that idea patentable. Section one-twelve's separate written-description rule requires the application, as filed, to show a skilled reader that the inventors possessed the claimed invention.

In Re Gonthier (No. 25-1477) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued October 5, 2026.

Sources
Argument audio — Federal Circuit court original:https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/oral-arguments/25-1477_10052026.mp3
Recording and argument date — Federal Circuit:https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/10-05-2026-2025-1477-in-re-gonthier-audio-uploaded/
Published application and prosecution history — US20180365662A1, application16/108,860:https://patents.google.com/patent/US20180365662A1/en
Case and appealed application identity — Federal Circuit judgment:https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/25-1477.RULE_36_JUDGMENT.10-8-2026_2768372.pdf
Abstract ideas and generic computers — Alice v. CLS Bank:https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-573/pdf/USREPORTS-573-208.pdf
Patent eligibility — USPTO examination guidance2106:https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2106.html
Written description — 35 U.S.C. §112, official Patent Laws copy:https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep-9015-appx-l.html
Written-description standard — Ariad v. Eli Lilly, en banc:https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/08-1248.pdf
De novo definition — Ninth Circuit review-standards guide:https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/uploads/guides/stand_of_review/I.%20Definitions%202022.htm
Independent de novo analysis — Rocha v. Thaler:https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/05/05-70028-CV1.wpd.pdf

0:00
0:00