Automakers Seek To Dodge Signal IP's Safety Patent Suit
Share us on: By Lisa Ryan
Law360, New York (June 29, 2015, 6:55 PM ET) -- Nissan North America Inc., Mazda Motor of America Inc. and Subaru of America Inc. on Friday urged a California federal judge to pare further claims from a suit accusing the automakers of ripping off Signal IP’s car safety patents, saying Signal admits the patent contains an error since its claim constructions contradict.
The automakers asked U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt to grant partial summary judgment of invalidity for indefiniteness over two claims in U.S. Patent No. 5,463,374, owned by Signal, since the claim term “data format” is indefinite and doesn’t explain the scope of the invention.
“Plaintiff does not contest that there is, at least, an error in the patent, arguing that the patent’s contradictory descriptions of “data format” result from a ‘typo,’” the motion said. “But, regardless of how plaintiff might characterize the disclosure, its argument implicitly admits that without revision or correction, the meaning of ’data format’ would have been unclear to a person of skill in the art.”
Signal, a subsidiary of patent acquisition and monetization firm Marathon Patent Group Inc., fired off 12 suits in April 2014 accusing a number of car companies of violating different combinations of seven of its patents.
The patents-in-suit cover a host of safety and efficiency features, including a radar system used to detect when objects enter a driver’s blind spot and a method for determining whether to deploy an air bag based on which direction an infant is facing.
The patents also cover technology used in the car companies’ cruise control, collision warning and keyless entry systems. Another patent describes a method for when to use electric power in a hybrid vehicle.
On April 17, the court issued a claim construction order finding that certain terms in some of the claims of three of the patents were indefinite and, as a result, the parties stipulated on May 20 to a partial final judgment of invalidity on those claims.
The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent No. 5,463,374.
Counsel for the parties didn’t respond to Monday requests for comment.
Signal is represented by Ryan E. Hatch and Jason L. Haas of Liner LLP.
Mazda and Subaru are represented by Patrick Dean, Paul R. Steadman, Matthew D. Satchwell, Steven J. Reynolds and Michael A. Geller of DLA Piper LLP. Nissan is represented by Basil T. Webb, Patrick A. Lujin, Richard D. Eiszner, Douglas W. Robinson and Gabriel Scott Spooner of Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP.
The cases are Signal IP Inc. v. Mazda Motor of America Inc., case number 8:14-cv-00491; Signal IP Inc v. Nissan North America Inc., case number 2:14-cv-02962; and Signal IP Inc. v. Mitsubishi Motors North America Inc., case number 8:14-cv-00497; all in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
--Additional reporting by Aebra Coe, Alex Lawson and Michael Lipkin. Editing by Kelly Duncan.
AI
