Optolum, Inc. v. Cree, Inc.

N OTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
OPTOLUM, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
CREE, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee
______________________
2022-1511
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Middle District of North Carolina in No. 1:17-cv-00687-
WO-JLW, Judge William L. Osteen, Jr.
______________________
Decided: June 12, 2023
______________________
L EIGH J OHN MARTINSON, McCarter & English, LLP,
Boston, MA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also repre-
sented by L EAH R. MCCOY ; J ACOB STEVEN W HARTON, Wom-
ble Bond Dickinson LLP, Winston-Salem, NC.
BLANEY HARPER, Jones Day, Washington, DC, argued
for defendant-appellee. Also represented by EDWIN
G ARCIA ; P ETER D ANIEL SIDDOWAY , Sage Patent Group, Ra-
leigh, NC.
______________________
Case: 22-1511 Document: 36 Page: 1 Filed: 06/12/2023

-- 1 of 2 --

OPTOLUM , INC. v. CREE, INC. 2
Before L OURIE, T ARANTO, and HUGHES , Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
OptoLum, Inc. (“OptoLum”) asks us to reverse a dis-
trict court decision finding prosecution history disclaimer
and estoppel, in addition to excluding certain expert testi-
mony. Although there is room for debate regarding the
statements made during prosecution that sit at the core of
this case, prosecution history disclaimer and estoppel are
legal questions on which we agree with the district court.
We have considered OptoLum’s remaining arguments but
find them unpersuasive. For the foregoing reasons, the de-
cision of the district court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED
Case: 22-1511 Document: 36 Page: 2 Filed: 06/12/2023

-- 2 of 2 --