September 25, 2025
Cree LED Settles Lawsuit Over Video Display Tech
Company casts deal as a warning to manufacturers using similar component designs
Cree LED announced that its patent infringement lawsuit against ADJ Products has been resolved, closing a another chapter in its campaign to enforce intellectual property rights across the LED display industry.
The settlement, announced September 24, includes a limited license for ADJ to use certain Cree LED patents covering LED components commonly found in high-resolution video panels. Though court records still show the case as active, the parties are expected to file a dismissal motion soon, formally ending the litigation.
The agreement allows ADJ to continue selling its VS3IP LED video display panels, at the center of the dispute, without further disruption.
Above: Excerpt from Cree LED 2024 complaint
Cree LED asserted willful infringement and sought damages, as well as injunctive relief. According to court documents, ADJ was formally notified of the alleged violations in mid-2024 and received detailed claim charts mapping Cree LED’s patents to the disputed products.
In its 2024 complaint, Cree LED emphasized not only the legal violation but the broader stakes for the display industry, citing the need to protect innovation, product reliability, and the integrity of the LED supply chain.
While the public announcement confirms a “mutually beneficial” resolution, the court docket still shows the case as active, with pretrial deadlines set well into 2027. A joint motion to dismiss is expected soon.
A Second Front
On July 15, Cree LED filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, accusing NanoLumens of infringing six patents tied to its outdoor display technology. The complaint focuses on NanoLumens’ “Nixel Series Outdoor P8 Display” and alleges that it incorporates unlicensed Cree LED innovations related to moisture resistance, pixel configuration, and SMD design.
Cree LED claims that NanoLumens was formally notified of the potential infringement nearly a year earlier and provided with detailed claim charts in early 2025. Like the ADJ case, the NanoLumens suit alleges willful infringement and seeks both monetary damages and an injunction to halt product sales.
The legal filings in both cases lean heavily on Cree LED’s assertion that its technologies are foundational to modern LED display performance, particularly in outdoor environments where brightness, durability and reliability are essential.
Pattern or Precedent?
For ADJ, the limited license provides legal cover and supply chain clarity. But the case may set a precedent for how Cree LED approaches enforcement moving forward: initiate litigation, pursue licensing through pressure, and broadcast outcomes as a deterrent.
For OEMs, resellers, and integrators — especially those using offshore-manufactured components that closely mimic established LED packages — the warning is clear. If Cree LED’s patented technology is embedded in a display, licensed or not, the company is likely to take notice.
The formal dismissal in the ADJ case is expected to appear in court records in the coming days. Meanwhile, the NanoLumens case is just beginning — and certain LED stakeholders may be watching closely to see who might be next.
