Lewis Hamilton escapes F1 safety patent suit
A Texas judge has granted racing driver Lewis Hamilton’s motion to dismiss himself from a patent infringement suit centered on safety devices.
On Friday, November 20, Judge Alan Albright of the US District Court for the Western District of Texas granted the motion after Hamilton’s counsel argued that the racing driver should be dismissed.
In March this year, patent owner Jens Nygaard filed suit against Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (the governing body of motor sport), Formula One and racing teams Mercedes Benz Grand Prix, Ferrari, and Red Bull Racing, among others.
According to Nygaard, the defendants were infringing US patent number 7,494,178 through the use of Halo and Aeroscreen, safety devices which protect the heads and necks of drivers.
According to the suit, while Nygaard’s vehicle safety patents were pending in the UK, he reached out to manufacturers, government regulators, FIA, Delta, Formula One and others in the automobile industry to improve safety with his patent pending inventions.
Over the following years, he discussed the inventions and consulted with major car manufacturers, added the claim.
Hamilton, as a driver for Mercedes in Formula One, was also named in the claim. Nygaard claimed that Hamilton had directly infringed the patent by driving one of the infringing Mercedes vehicles in each of the 2018 and 2019 US Grand Prix in Austin, Texas in vehicles that implemented the Halo.
In September this year, Hamilton’s counsel claimed that Nygaard had “improperly” brought Hamilton into the suit, and that he should be dismissed from the litigation under principles involving the customer suit exception.
“This situation is precisely what the customer-suit exception is designed to guard against, and it would set dangerous precedent to allow plaintiffs to sue individual end-users personally, for patent infringement, in these circumstances,” said Celine Jimenez Crowson, partner at Hogan Lovells and Hamilton’s counsel.
Crowson added that Hamilton is “at least thrice-removed from being the ‘true defendant’ in this litigation”.
Hamilton is a driver for Mercedes, which doesn’t make the accused Halo device and is itself an end-user, said the motion filed by Hamilton’s counsel.
“Further, MBGP is required by FIA to install and use the Halo device on its F1 racing car pursuant to FIA’s strict specifications and requirements. Hamilton played no role in the design, development, or manufacture of the Halo device,” she added.
Nearly two months later, Judge Albright dismissed the case without prejudice against Hamilton.
Claims against racing driver Charles Leclerc, who is currently racing in Formula One for Ferrari, were also dismissed. Leclerc was represented by David Levy, partner at Morgan Lewis & Bockius.
DJ Healey, senior principal at Fish & Richardson and counsel for Nygaard, said: “Hamilton was dismissed without prejudice after Mercedes Grand Prix took responsibility for his acts accused of infringement and Hamilton agreed to be bound by the results of the lawsuit.
“The dismissal is without prejudice, and if necessary Hamilton can be rejoined in the lawsuit. This was not a ruling on the merits of any claim or defence.”
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox
Today’s top stories
Puma kicks out at FIFA’s World Cup TM
