Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

OptoLum, Inc. v. Cree, Inc., No. 22-1511 (Fed. Cir. June 12, 2023)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 22-1511
Decided
June 12, 2023
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

LEIGH JOHN MARTINSON, McCarter & English, LLP, Boston, MA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by LEAH R. MCCOY; JACOB STEVEN WHARTON, Womble Bond Dickinson LLP, Winston-Salem, NC. BLANEY HARPER, Jones Day, Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by EDWIN GARCIA; PETER DANIEL SIDDOWAY, Sage Patent Group, Raleigh, NC.

22 OPTOLUM, INC. v. CREE, INC.

Before LOURIE, TARANTO, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.

OptoLum, Inc. (“OptoLum”) asks us to reverse a district court decision finding prosecution history disclaimer and estoppel, in addition to excluding certain expert testimony. 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 decision of the district court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

OptoLum, Inc. v. Cree, Inc., No. 22-1511 (Fed. Cir. June 12, 2023).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-22-01511-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-22-01511-0

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.