Case: 22-1511 Document: 36 Page: 1 Filed: 06/12/2023

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 repre- sented by LEAH R. MCCOY; JACOB STEVEN WHARTON, Wom- ble 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, Ra- leigh, NC. ______________________ Case: 22-1511 Document: 36 Page: 2 Filed: 06/12/2023

2 OPTOLUM, INC. v. CREE, INC.

Before LOURIE, TARANTO, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. PER 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