Volvo sued over automatic features in cars
IP holding company Vision Works filed patent infringement suits against car makers in Georgia and New Jersey | Complaints claim products including ‘remote start’, ‘pilot assist’ and ‘start/stop’ breach IP rights.
Volvo and Subaru have been hit with patent infringement lawsuits in the same week by IP acquisition company Vision Works, which allege the car manufacturers had infringed patented technology in vehicle features.
Vision Works sued Subaru at the Northern District of Georgia federal court on March 4, and Volvo at the New Jersey federal court on March 8.
The Washington-based company accused Subaru of infringing six of its patents: US numbers 8,315,769; 8,437,935; 8,682,558; 8,954,251; 9,830,821; and 10,436,125.
It claimed that Subaru’s VDC system, ‘auto start stop technology’, ‘MySubaru app’ and ‘eyesight driver assist technology’ infringed one or more claims of the patents-in-suit.
Against Volvo, Vision Works asserted the ‘769, ‘935, ‘558 and ‘251 patents, alleging that its ‘4-C active chassis’, ‘remote start’, ‘start/stop’ and ‘pilot assist’ products breached its patented technology.
All the patents are titled “Absolute acceleration sensor for use within moving vehicles”.
The complaint against Volvo alleged that the automaker “has a policy or practice of not reviewing the patents of others, including instructing its employees to not review the patents of others, and thus [has] been wilfully blind of Vision Works’ patent rights”.
Vision Works asked the courts for damages, injunctions and costs.
Patents asserted in the past
Vision Works describes itself as a “value-add company” that acquires IP, adds value then monetises it by licensing the rights, selling the IP, asserting it through legal means or spinning it off to form new entities.
It sued Nissan in 2022 in California for allegedly infringing four of the patents listed in the above suits, as well as US number 10,391,989.
In July 2023, Unified Patents filed an ex parte examination proceeding against the ‘935 patent, one of the patents asserted against Nissan that was previously asserted against Mercedez-Benz.
Patent data company RPX Insight reported last week that Vision Work’s two latest filings were in jurisdictions that impose heightened disclosure requirements on litigants.
This referred to a list of [non-parties] having an interest which could be substantially affected by the outcome of the case in Georgia, and disclosure about certain litigation funding relationships in New Jersey.
In Vision Works IP v Volvo, Vision Works is represented by Maureen Scorese of Chugh and James McDonough and Jonathan Miller of Rozier Hardt McDonough.
In Vision Works IP v Subaru, Vision Works is represented by McDonough and Miller of Rozier Hardt McDonough.
