⚖ 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

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. v. ITC — Fed. Cir. (Oct 5, 2026)

No. 25-1791 Argued October 5, 2026 Published October 6, 2026

Samsung Display seeks to keep allegedly patent-infringing mobile-device screens out of the United States. It brought an import complaint at the International Trade Commission over display panels and modules. The Commission ended the investigation with no violation because Samsung had not demonstrated a qualifying domestic industry. Samsung now challenges that result in the Federal Circuit. Section 337 of the Tariff Act can authorize exclusion of patent-infringing imports, but infringement alone is not enough. The patent owner must also establish a domestic industry tied to articles protected by the patent. You will hear two shorthand terms: the technical prong asks whether the domestic-industry products use the patented invention; the economic prong concerns qualifying United States investment. The statutory categories include significant investment in plant and equipment, or significant employment of labor or capital. Samsung will seek reversal of the domestic-industry finding; the Commission will defend it. We hear Samsung Display v. ITC in the Federal Circuit, argued October fifth, twenty twenty-six.

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. v. ITC (No. 25-1791) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued October 5, 2026.

Sources
Argument audio — Federal Circuit, No. 25-1791:https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/oral-arguments/25-1791_10052026.mp3
Argument date — official Federal Circuit recording index:https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/home/oral-argument/listen-to-oral-arguments/
Complaint, proceedings and domestic-industry finding — March 19, 2025 Commission notice:https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-03-25/pdf/2025-04982.pdf
Patent imports and domestic industry — 19 U.S.C. § 1337:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1337
Issue and argument preservation — 19 C.F.R. § 210.43:https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/19/210.43
Review of an agency’s actual reasons — SEC v. Chenery, majority opinion:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/318/80
Cathy Chen’s appearance — public Federal Circuit docket snapshot:https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/cafc/25-1791

0:00
0:00