1. “Whether the district court clearly erred by finding that Nevro was irreparably harmed.”
2. “Whether the district court erred legally by not holding the term ‘nonparesthesia- producing . . . signal’ to be indefinite.”
3. “Whether the district court erred legally or clearly erred factually by finding the claims at issue not anticipated by, or obvious over, prior art to Royle.”
4. “Whether the district court clearly erred by finding that the preliminary injunction would not injure the public interest.”
5. “Whether the injunction is overbroad in scope.”
“The parties having so agreed, it is ORDERED that the proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b). Each side shall bear its own costs.”
