On September 3, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission determined not to review Order No. 77 in Investigation No. 337-TA-1443, Certain Foreign-Fabricated Semiconductor Devices, Products Containing the Same, and Components Thereof. The Federal Register published the notice on September 8 (FR Doc. 2026-18260). The result is termination of the investigation in its entirety.

How it ended

Complainants Longitude Licensing Ltd. and Marlin Semiconductor Limited, both of Dublin, Ireland, and respondent Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited filed an unopposed joint motion on July 14, 2026 to terminate based on settlement. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations supported the motion on July 21. On August 5, the ALJ granted the motion under Commission Rule 210.21(b) and limited service of the unredacted confidential settlement agreements to the complainants, TSMC, and OUII. No petitions for review of the ID were filed. The Commission vote not to review was September 3.

Why the whole case went away

The ID treated the remaining respondents as alleged direct or indirect customers of TSMC. With TSMC out on settlement, the ALJ terminated the investigation as to everyone still in the case. That is a full termination, not a TSMC-only exit. Apple Inc. had already been terminated on June 26, 2026, on its own settlement (Order No. 71, unreviewed).

The patents

The institution narrative, as restated in the Federal Register notice, listed asserted claims of U.S. Patents 7,745,847; 9,093,473; 9,147,747; 9,184,292; and 9,953,880. The investigation was instituted March 26, 2025. Original respondents included TSMC, Apple, Broadcom, Qualcomm, OnePlus, Motorola entities, and Lenovo entities (later amended).

What it means in practice

A foundry settlement can end an ITC case against a customer chain when the complaint's infringement theory runs through that foundry. Downstream respondents who never signed their own deal still leave when the ALJ and Commission treat them as TSMC customers. The public record here does not publish the settlement terms.

What to watch next

Whether parallel district-court cases on the same Longitude/Marlin patents continue, and whether any customer seeks fees or costs that the ITC record does not address.