October Term 2011 · Docket 10-1472

Does the term interpreter cover written translation fees?

The dispute centers on whether federal courts can charge the losing party for written translation work under the interpreter fee statute.

Official caption: Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd.
Latest argument session: 2012-02-21
Latest official Court activity: 2012-02-21
Latest verified event: Argued
Sources analyzed through: Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

2026-08-29 — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

Argument 1 · 2012-02-21

What happened at the argument
Michael Fried argued the statute limits fees to spoken communication.
He cited the Court Interpreters Act as primary authority for this view.
Justice Sotomayor noted the dictionary definition includes translation work.
She asked why the Court should change existing practices.

Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 17-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 19-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-11 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 51-9

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of 28 U.S.C. section 1920(6). The statute allows courts to award fees for interpreters. The parties disagree on whether this term includes written translation services.