Toyota sued over Prius transmission patent

Toyota sued over Prius transmission patent
Solomon Technologies claims the automaker infringes on Electric Wheel plan in 2 models.

By Sophia Pearson/Bloomberg News

Toyota Motor (http://javascript<b></b>:companybox('TM')) Corp. infringes on a patent in the transmission it uses in its Prius model, a lawsuit filed by a maker of electric motors claims.

Solomon Technologies Inc. accuses Toyota, the world's second-largest automaker, of infringing on its Electric Wheel patent in the Prius and Highlander models. The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Tampa, Fla., is asking a judge to bar Toyota from further infringement and seeks unspecified damages, according to a statement distributed by Business Wire.

"While we are aware of the difficulties faced by a small company seeking to protect its patent rights against a large company like Toyota, we are determined to use every effort to realize for our shareholders the benefits from our patented technology," Solomon President Peter DeVecchis said in the statement.

DeVecchis didn't immediately return a phone call seeking further comment. Solomon Technologies examined an existing Toyota Prius transmission against its patent claims before filing suit, the statement said. The company, based in Tarpon Springs, Fla., develops and sells electric drive motors for the marine industry.

Toyota said it may sell as many as 250,000 hybrid cars this year, mainly the Prius model. In 2006 it plans to produce as many as 400,000 hybrids, while trying to lower costs, President Katsuaki Watanabe said Monday in New York. Sales may rise to 1 million in 2010.

Shares of Solomon Technologies rose 1 cent to 36 cents Monday in Nasdaq Stock Market trading. Toyota's American depositary receipts rose 21 cents to $85.36 in New York Stock Exchange trading.

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0509/13/C06-313165.htm

This guy is a fool. I hate these types of lawsuits that claim a corporation "stole" their idea. Toyota will kill him like a bug.

This guy is a fool. I hate these types of lawsuits that claim a corporation "stole" their idea. Toyota will kill him like a bug.You are a blind fool. You seem to know nothing about patents or infringement. Your last sentence highlights your ignorance even more.

It's true. This is just like those scum bag lawyers who say "if you've taken Vioxx call me, and I'll get you the money you deserve".:rolleyes:

It's true. This is just like those scum bag lawyers who say "if you've taken Vioxx call me, and I'll get you the money you deserve".:rolleyes:Buddy, there's a huge difference between Vioxx and hybrid technology patents. :ugh3:

I was using the Vioxx incident as an example of what scum bag lawyers use to sue big corporations.

It's true. This is just like those scum bag lawyers who say "if you've taken Vioxx call me, and I'll get you the money you deserve".:rolleyes:

1) God gave you a mouth to speak out of. He also gave you the ability to close it. Think about that one.

2) God gave you the ability to learn. Pay attention, I'm gonna teach you something.


Copyright infringement is a serious accusation and violation because people spend time and effort and money to create things, and if anyone can take it as will, it affects countless people's livelihoods, and nothing is sacred any longer. Hence why the record labels are suing individuals for downloading songs, movies and other copyrighted material from free file-sharing services. You take without giving proper credit and that's theft. Hence why when you write a term paper and you quote someone else's writings, you must cite (or give a reference to) that person and his/her work.

Why is the lawyer telling people to call him if they took Vioxx?

1) he has to feed his family and keep his lights on and his Toyota/Lexus/GM or whatever he drives gassed up.

2) Merck & Co., the makers of Vioxx were selling a drug that had a high incidence of causing the heart attacks people were taking it to prevent. Merck knew about it years ago, but didn't do anything. People have lost their lives, or have had internal injuries that could've been avoided if Merck issued a warning and/or recalled the meds. But they didn't. They tried to cover it up until all the dominos started to fall. They deserve to be sued by patients in civil court. Merck also deserves a criminal conviction as well.

You can't compare copyright infringement with a defect cover-up. they're two different beasts.

You would think that the patent laywers for Toyota would've been able to do it properly. This is the seoncd one in the past month or so. Seems like other companies are just trying to jump on the success of Toyota with an out of court settlement.

LOL! Regardless of who's at fault here, Toyota will delay this case until some much later date...and then just close the matter by writing a check from petty cash. :lol:

Anyone can file a lawsuit. Getting it before a judge with sufficient evidence to bring the case to trial is a much bigger deal. So let the games begin!! :naughty:

I wouldn't hold your breath on this one.

Well, the funny thing is, haven't Toyota developed this transmission way back in early 2000s? So why is this company sueing them now? I know it may take some while, but 1.5 years after it was introduced? Not to mention they been developing the Prius since 1993.

Before anyone criticize my reply, I said developed not produce the Prius since 1993. Two different words and meaning. ;)

Not sure if its allowed, but couldn't Toyota just acquire the company for change they found in their corporate sofas? Patent problem solved. Heck, if they are truely able to develop such high tech trannies, Toyota might have a true assets in their hands if they do acquire it.

The tranny in the Prius is one of those continuously variable transmissions isn't it?:hammer:

Sure is, HoboJoe.
Cap'n

May somebody in the company finaly bought a Prius and disassembled the tranny? and that guy in the company said, "Hey wait a minute, this looks like our model, but that model was for boats!!!" who knows, the fact is some one is suing toyota.
and by the way i am wondering how people who file patent lawsuits claim noticed that their pattent is being infringed on. all i know is this small conpany is going to get :ownedsmas
or maybe bought out by toyota. Muahaha, floatable Camry's anyone?

You are missing several very important facts:

1) Solomon received there patent in 1991, well before Toyota began developing the Prius.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5067932 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5067932)

2) It doesn't matter if Toyota deliberately stole the technology, or if they developed it independently on their own. It is Toyota's responsibility to ensure they are not illegally using already patented technology.

3) Solomon may only have a market cap of $2.5MM, and trade as SOLM.OB. I would suspect however that the majority ownership of the company is not publicly held, hence Toyota could simply buy-up all available share and do a hostile take-over. Solomon would have to want to be bought out and if you knew the history of the company you'd understand why this is highly unlikely. They are more than a little idealistic about the potential of their product to revolutionize propulsion in all applications and change the world away from fuel burning motors. I'm fairly certain they have refused previous buy out attempts and I know they've rejected previously exclusive licensing offers. But who knows, since the original founder and inventor (Dave Tether) left the company a few months ago maybe things have changed.

4) Solomon has always had in their business plan using the Electric wheel (Us Pat 5067932) for automotive uses, hence they have always expected to make billions of it. Regardless they won't be bought out for their current market cap. They will probably hold Toyota over a barrel and get them to settle for a huge sum, plus royalties from now until eternity.

TOYOTA ROW MAY NET UK TIDDLER £41M; FINANCIAL EXPRESS

TINY British inventor Antonov could be boosted by a ?60million (£41million) injection thanks to a patent dispute involving the Toyota Prius car.


The Aim-quoted, Manchester-based company is suing Toyota in a Dusseldorf patent court for using a hybrid gearbox design that Antonov says infringes a patent it published 16 years ago.

Toyota promotes its hybrid drive Prius as an environmentally friendly vehicle that achieves up to 60 miles a gallon.


A key element of Toyota's drive is a system that uses an electric motor and electrical generator to enhance a petrol engine's economy that Antonov says is covered by its patent. Toyota has sold 320,000 Prius vehicles featuring the drive.


Julian Tolley, a City analyst close to Antonov, said the firm could be awarded as much as ?60million, but said the matter could be settled outside of the patent court for less than ?10million.


Chief executive John Moore was also confident that Antonov had a solid case. "To take on Toyota in this way is not something a small company like ours does lightly, " he said.


Toyota was unavailable for comment

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publishe...624011&start=17 (http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=652&topicId=10884&docId=l:315624011&start=17)


More information about antonov.

http://www.antonov-transmission.com/ antonov homepage

http://www.antonov-******te.nl/ antonov ******te for more info

http://www.antonovforum.com/ antonov forum dutch/englisch

http://members.lycos.nl/magpie69/Antonovpatents.htm used patents

Dawnay, Day Townsley – Morning Flash News
14 October 2005


Antonov
103.5p

Market Cap £30.4m

Update on Toyota Patent Infringement Case


Antonov, the innovative automotive technology company, today clarified the timescale in which the patent infringement case with Toyota will proceed. The case relates to a CVT design which boosts the drive from an engine with an electric motor and is an integral part of Toyota’s hybrid power train. It is currently being used on the Toyota Prius (over 320,000 produced to date), the Lexus RX400h and has also been licensed to Nissan, Ford, Porsche and Daihatsu.


The case is being held in the German courts due to the low costs (circa. €100,000) and fixed timescale:


16 January 2006 - Toyota to respond to Antonov’s writ
2 May 2006 - Antonov to address Toyota’s response
7 August 2006 - Toyota’s final opportunity to refine defence
29 August 2006 - Oral hearing


If the procedure goes through to completion, Antonov would have the right to block sales of cars using the infringed patent within the EU jurisdiction; a very powerful bargaining tool indeed but unlikely to be used.



Toyota has already offered a settlement. Antonov, however, has stated that this does not reflect a fair payment for the IP.



We estimate the volume of Prius’, alone, built to date and in the future as:



Currently produced 320,000

Expected for 2006 120,000

From 2007-expiry 360,000



Assuming a royalty of $20 per car would lead to a figure of $16m (£9m). We would expect any German court to take into account other models using the license from Toyota which could lead to a settlement of up to €40-60m (£28-41m). In comparison to Antonov’s current market capitalisation of £30m we expect this to lead to a significant re-valuation.



We expect Antonov’s first commercial revenues to begin in Q4 this year from sales of a 2 speed gearbox incorporated into a Rotrex supercharger. Antonov’s 6 speed and Dual Clutch gearbox are in a production planning stage and we expect these to generate initial revenues in 2007.



More information about antonov.

http://www.antonov-transmission.com/
http://www.antonov-******te.nl/
http://www.antonovforum.com/
http://members.lycos.nl/magpie69/Antonovpatents.htm

Dawnay, Day Townsley – Morning Flash News


14 October 2005


Antonov
103.5p

Market Cap £30.4m

Update on Toyota Patent Infringement Case


Antonov, the innovative automotive technology company, today clarified the timescale in which the patent infringement case with Toyota will proceed. The case relates to a CVT design which boosts the drive from an engine with an electric motor and is an integral part of Toyota’s hybrid power train. It is currently being used on the Toyota Prius (over 320,000 produced to date), the Lexus RX400h and has also been licensed to Nissan, Ford, Porsche and Daihatsu.


The case is being held in the German courts due to the low costs (circa. €100,000) and fixed timescale:


16 January 2006 - Toyota to respond to Antonov’s writ
2 May 2006 - Antonov to address Toyota’s response
7 August 2006 - Toyota’s final opportunity to refine defence
29 August 2006 - Oral hearing

If the procedure goes through to completion, Antonov would have the right to block sales of cars using the infringed patent within the EU jurisdiction; a very powerful bargaining tool indeed but unlikely to be used.



Toyota has already offered a settlement. Antonov, however, has stated that this does not reflect a fair payment for the IP.



We estimate the volume of Prius’, alone, built to date and in the future as:



Currently produced 320,000

Expected for 2006 120,000

From 2007-expiry 360,000



Assuming a royalty of $20 per car would lead to a figure of $16m (£9m). We would expect any German court to take into account other models using the license from Toyota which could lead to a settlement of up to €40-60m (£28-41m). In comparison to Antonov’s current market capitalisation of £30m we expect this to lead to a significant re-valuation.



We expect Antonov’s first commercial revenues to begin in Q4 this year from sales of a 2 speed gearbox incorporated into a Rotrex supercharger. Antonov’s 6 speed and Dual Clutch gearbox are in a production planning stage and we expect these to generate initial revenues in 2007.



More information about antonov.

http://www.antonov-transmission.com/
http://www.antonov-******te.nl/
http://www.antonovforum.com/
http://members.lycos.nl/magpie69/Antonovpatents.htm


16-1-2006 toyota to respond to antonov's writ

nothing heard from toyota?:confused:

Toyota will squash them into the ground.

LOL...dont be so sure, Cress.

Seriously, this is just some loser company that wants to play the extortion game on Toyota. Toyota can easily hire high-priced lawyers to make sure this company doesn't make it past February. Hell I bet Toyota has never even heard of them before.

Cressida, Toyota is not a god. They have to abide by rules, and clearly they did not buy the rights to patent. Solomon Technologies owns the patent and is entitled to money from each company that uses it. You talk like Toyota can just walk over whoever they want and do whatever they please...that is not how business works. :rolleyes:


"Toyota hybrids to be banned for patent infringement?"

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/01/16/toyota-hybrids-to-be-banned-for-patent-infringement/

Toyota's first hybrid car was in the 70s

Toyota's G21 project started in 1991

The Prius concept car was shown in Oct 95 at the Tokyo Motor Show dubbed the EMS - Energy Management System. The word hybrid was not allowed to be used to avoid giving clues to competing companies about their plan for the Prius.

The Prius (NHW-10) was launched in Dec 1997 in Japan.



So, why did this guy take so long to file a claim? Why did he wait until the Prius became popular? Was he too chicken to file a lawsuit against a vehicle sold in Japan?


The "transmission" in the Prius is called the Power Split Device. Toyota calls it a CVT in the brochure just to make it easier on regular Joes to understand. The PSD is a planetary gear set consisting of a sun gear in the middle, with planet gears orbiting it and finally a ring gear as the outmost gear. This design allows the engine to shut off and still allow the car to accelerate (in EV mode) without having the engine come on.

This is the antonov patent with the sun gear and planet gears.

http://www.antonov-******te.nl/0000009639064fc01/000000963a0bd5008/index.html

Looks like he has a beef with Honda too.

I can't enlarge his picture. The other pictures at the bottom are from Toyota and from other Prius owners.

Cressida, Toyota is not a god. They have to abide by rules, and clearly they did not buy the rights to patent. Solomon Technologies owns the patent and is entitled to money from each company that uses it. You talk like Toyota can just walk over whoever they want and do whatever they please...that is not how business works. :rolleyes:


"Toyota hybrids to be banned for patent infringement?"

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/01/16/toyota-hybrids-to-be-banned-for-patent-infringement/

You're actually buying this garbage? They don't own a thing. Tideland Prius is right; Why the hell did it take them this long to sue? This company is just looking for a quick buck, I know that & YOU know that.

Besides, Toyota itself filed for many patents for the Prius. The company should've been well aware of the Prius and the type of transmission it uses before it came ashore. Of course they couldn't right? They're not gonna sue Toyota if the car is in Japan, it'd be too costly. The fact that they want Toyota to BAN the sale of the Prius means they have ulterior motives. I mean, asking for royalty is, I suppose reasonable but asking that Toyota be banned from selling cars is just asking for it. Toyota made 1 trillion yen profit for 2004. Why wouldn't a tiny little company in Florida not want a piece of that money?

Cress, just chill out. Nick wants to get a rise out of you. Dont play his game.
If Toyota, Honda and Ford are invloved in this, its gotta make you wonder if GM's hybrids are going to be targeted too.
Im with Tideland in saying, "why didnt this come to light before?" Its not like the Prius just came out this past year. I also cant see why he would turn down royalties and instead just ban the sale of the Prius. It kinda makes you wonder if this guy works for the oil companies. :dunno:

Hmmm... conspiracy anyone? :):):)

Cress, just chill out. Nick wants to get a rise out of you. Dont play his game.
If Toyota, Honda and Ford are invloved in this, its gotta make you wonder if GM's hybrids are going to be targeted too.
Im with Tideland in saying, "why didnt this come to light before?" Its not like the Prius just came out this past year. I also cant see why he would turn down royalties and instead just ban the sale of the Prius. It kinda makes you wonder if this guy works for the oil companies. :dunno:

The article said the ITC could ban sales of the Prius and other Toyota hybrids, if they found copyright infringement to be the case. But chances are, it won't get to that, and Toyota would pay a nice ransom before the trial ends. Worst case scenario really is that they wait until the end of the trial, are found guilty of copyright infringement, and Prius sales are stopped for like a week while a deal is hammered out.

I believe this b*** s***................ NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Does anybody else smell a setup here?

Boy these A** H**** would do anything to take Toyota down.

Who thought of this idea? Ford or GM ?? or was it somebody else?

Oh we can't beat Toyota in quality, let's start using some other methods to beat it down.

:disappoin

Every single dirty trick is trying to take its stab at Toyota.
Well, guess what Morons, Toyota is America now. It is made in America by Americans. You take Toyota down, you are not hurting nobody else but yourself.............

I am going out for AIR............. FFFFFF %$^&$%#$&^%&$#^%^ FFFFF#$%#%#$%%

You're actually buying this garbage? They don't own a thing. Tideland Prius is right; Why the hell did it take them this long to sue? This company is just looking for a quick buck, I know that & YOU know that.

You're stating the obvious. If you're in the Electric Wheel hybrid business and a large car manufacturer comes out with the same technology, any good company would research it and ensure its not their technology. Once they found out its theirs, they have two options: Sue Toyota as early as possible and get little, or sue Toyota while they have hundreds of thousands of cars on the road using your product.

Patent infrigement is huge and if Toyota did steal, use the technology, they are at huge fault. Their patent laywers, engineers whatever should have researched it...and most likely they did. No way such a large corporation could have overlooked something like this.

Good for Solomon Technologies to wait till the last moment...hopefully they'll get a good chuck of sales of every Prius sold and any future sales...either that, or be bought out by Toyota.

In my view, it's the cost of doing business...this happens all the time in the corporate world.

Like you said, how can a big company like Toyota overlook something such as this especially since it was supposed to be groundbreaking.

I think that toyota knows that there patent doesnt infinge. All you need is evidence that your product or another product using the tech was out before the patent was granted right ?That shouldnt be too hard to proove.

I think the lawsuit is fairly suspect given the track record of Japanese companies and patents. If you've followed their history, Japanese companies don't just patent their device, they also patent 10 different ways to do the same thing. They patent flood basically. Why is VVTi so oddly implemented compared with VTEC? Because Honda patented almost every way they could to produce the same effect. Toyota and Yamaha had to be careful not to step on any of Honda's patents on the technology.

So really what you have here isn't so much patent infringement but rather a really crappy patent office at work. It's true you file your own prior art search, but when Toyota filed for their patents, the freakin' patent office was supposed to determine if it was also patentable as well. So go figure?

In their defense the USPTO does get like a zillion requests every year and their budget basically sucks because I think we allow too many things to be patented, think Amazon's infamous one click patent. Then again I think there should also be some kind of limit on patent renewals too.

Why are we all bickering. Are we in Toyota Corporate Counsil? NOPE! Let the attorneys hammer it out. Let the dude/company file a claim, I'm not blindly going to support Toyota just cus i'm a toyota loyalist and/or a enthusiast. I'm going to give due process a chance, and i'm fairly confident that if indeed there is a claim by a third part entity on certain transmission and they have give a plausable reason and to why this is being brought up now, I'm sure a Judge may be intrested. As much as we all love toyota, the company itself isn't all that sait or god...Recall as to why st205's were put out of commission in certain rally's, that was deception. And toyota suffered cus of it. Rather than us all bicker, let the attornets bicker it out...they get paid to do this..

the patent looks very cryptic, but it appears that it is trying to be that way on purpose.

what it seems to try to do, is to patent how a differential or a planet gear system works, which intuitively is like trying to patent the wheel. I see that as too broad, and the patent might invalidate itself with respect to this law suit, and to me, that is Solomon's biggest risk.

also, a differential by it's very nature is a split power device. the entire patent claims to employ either a diff or a set of planet gears, but not both at one time. reads to be an either or approach.

what the patent does attempt to do is to imply that electric motor componets are "rigidly" attached to certain elements of the diff, or of the planet gears. to me, all systems are somehow "rigidly" attached to gears. for instance, A car windshield is rigidly attached the frame, which is rigidly attached to the motor...you get the picture. simply being attached means that the motor is attached to the tranny, which is attached to the driveshaft, etc. etc.

to me, the weakness of the patent is not that it does not have merits, but that it's claims are too broad, and fail to corral the whole concept of gearing arrangements that have been around for a very long time. remember, in patent law, all portions of a patent that try to claim previous inventions, existing, or expired inventions invalidate those portions of the patent that are claiming a new invention. even tho the USPTO granted that patent, it doesn't mean that any claims within the patent have a valid merit as new inventions. and because none of their art work appears to resemble any prius component, I don't think the law suit lacks merit.

Antonov