Untitled case

I'll research this case thoroughly before drafting the overview.

Good foundation. Let me dig into the specific patents, technology, and procedural details.

Let me verify additional details: IPR activity, the Texas origin case, and ATI's corporate profile.

Case Overview — Automotive Technologies Int'l, Inc. v. General Motors Corp. et al., No. 2:10-cv-10647 (E.D. Mich.)

Parties. The plaintiff, Automotive Technologies International, Inc. ("ATI"), is a Delaware corporation based in Denville, N.J., that holds the patent portfolio of inventor David S. Breed (with co-inventors Wilbur E. DuVall and Wendell C. Johnson) covering airbag crash sensing and occupant-detection technology. ATI is an inventor-controlled patent-holding and licensing entity rather than an operating automotive manufacturer; RPX's litigation database classifies it as an NPE, and contemporaneous coverage describes it as "closely held" and headed by Breed (see RPX Insight; Bloomberg via molawyersmedia). On the defense side, Delphi Corporation is the Tier 1 supplier that makes the accused product, joined by its bankruptcy-era successors DPH Holdings Corporation and Delphi Automotive Systems, LLC, and by the OEM customers who purchased and installed the product in their vehicles — General Motors (including Motors Liquidation Company, the pre-bankruptcy "old GM," and the "New GM" entities), Ford Motor Company, Volvo Cars of North America, Hyundai Motor America, Nissan North America, Mercedes-Benz USA, and Fuji Heavy Industries USA (Subaru). Delphi's counsel was John R. Hutchins of Kenyon & Kenyon, and ATI was represented by Andrew J. Kochanowski of Sommers Schwartz (Southfield, Mich.); Banner & Witcoff (Charles Shifley, Binal Patel, Theodore Field) represented Delphi/GM in the related earlier action ([Law.com](https://www.law.com

I'll research this case systematically, starting with the docket and case metadata.

Let me dig into the docket, the summary judgment opinion, and the Federal Circuit history.

Now let me pin down the 2:10-cv-10647 docket specifics, the parties, and any PTAB proceedings.

I'll research this case's docket and counsel. Let me start with several targeted searches.

Good leads. Let me drill into the docket and the specific attorneys.

Let me check the actual docket sheets (CourtListener/RECAP) and the Federal Circuit appeal counsel.

Counsel of Record for Plaintiff Automotive Technologies International, Inc. (ATI)

Important sourcing caveat up front: I was able to retrieve signature blocks, Federal Circuit service lists, and published opinions, but I could not independently pull the attorney-appearance entries from the 2:10-cv-10647 docket sheet itself (the case was consolidated into 2:08-cv-11048 for the summary-judgment proceedings and closed shortly after). Nothing indicates the relevant filings are sealed. The roster below is drawn from documents filed in the consolidated action (Nos. 08-cv-11048 and 10-cv-10647), where ATI's counsel of record is identical, and from the related Federal Circuit appeal. I flag where role labels are inferred rather than docket-confirmed.

---

1. Andrew J. (Andrew) Kochanowski — Michigan Bar No. P55117

• Role: Lead counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant ATI. He signed the operative papers on ATI's behalf in the consolidated action, including ATI's Notice of Appeal (dated March 31, 2011) from Judge Cleland's orders, and is the first-listed ATI counsel on the Federal Circuit service list in Appeal No. 2011-1292.
• Firm / office: Sommers Schwartz, P.C., 2000 Town Center, Suite 900, Southfield, MI 48075 (248-355-0300); email as filed: akochanowski@sommerspc.com.
• Experience note: A career patent litigator with substantial automotive and electronics work — e.g., plaintiff's counsel in ChriMar Systems, Inc. v. PowerDsine, Ltd. (E.D. Mich. Markman opinion, July 30, 2008, listing "Andrew Kochanowski, Lisa R. Mikalonis, Sommers, Schwartz, PC, Southfield, MI... for Plaintiff"), and for ATI in the earlier parallel action Automotive Technologies International, Inc. v. Hyundai Motor America, BMW of North America, Kia Motors America (D. Del. C.A. No. 06-391), where he appears in the Notice of Service service list. He has been ATI's recurring outside counsel across its patent campaigns.

2. Lisa Rycus Mikalonis — Michigan Bar No. P39485

• Role: Co-counsel / second chair for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant ATI. She appears jointly with Kochanowski on ATI's filings — the Notice of Appeal signature block reads "/s/ Andrew Kochanowski (P55117); Lisa Rycus Mikalonis (P39485); Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant," Sommers Schwartz, P.C., Southfield, MI (lmikalonis@sommerspc.com). Whether the docket styles her as co-lead or local counsel is not confirmable from the documents I retrieved; the joint signature blocks indicate she was counsel of record, not merely of counsel.
• Firm / office: Sommers Schwartz, P.C., Southfield, MI (same office as Kochanowski).
• Experience note: Also listed as plaintiff's counsel in the ChriMar v. PowerDsine Markman proceedings (E.D. Mich. 2008) and on ATI filings in the consolidated Michigan action; part of the same Sommers Schwartz patent-litigation team.

---

Other attorneys appearing in the ATI litigation (context — verify side before attributing)

• John R. Hutchins — appears on the Federal Circuit cc/service list for Appeal No. 2011-1292 alongside Kochanowski. At the relevant time he was a partner at Kenyon & Kenyon LLP (Washington, D.C.), later Hunton Andrews Kurth and now Banner Witcoff; his practice is first-chair patent litigation with automotive-component experience. The service list does not identify which party he represented in this appeal, so I cannot confirm he was ATI's appellate counsel — flagging as unverified.
• Paul Richard Steadman and David M. Schnorrenberg (both then at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner) and Reginald J. Hill (Jenner & Block) also appear on that same Federal Circuit service list. Based on their known representations in the consolidated case, these are defense-side counsel (e.g., Hill for the Chrysler/FCA-lineage defendants) — not plaintiff's counsel.
• Michael H. Baniak (McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff, Chicago) — co-counsel with Kochanowski for ATI in the Delaware action (C.A. 06-391). I found no evidence he entered an appearance in the Michigan case; list him only as ATI's co-counsel in the related campaign.

In-house counsel

None identified. ATI is a patent-holding company associated with inventor David S. Breed; no in-house attorney appeared in the retrieved filings.

---

Reliability notes

• Docket-confirmed by signature block: Kochanowski and Mikalonis as ATI's counsel of record in the consolidated 08-11048 / 10-10647 proceedings (ATI's Notice of Appeal, D. E. filed Mar. 31, 2011; reproduced at RPX Insight litigation document 2162120).
• Independently corroborated: CourtListener/Justia opinion in Automotive Technologies International, Inc. v. Delphi Corp., 776 F. Supp. 2d 469 (E.D. Mich. 2011) (Cleland, J.), confirming the 08-11048 / 10-10647 consolidation; Fed. Cir. nonprecedential orders in No. 2011-1292 (July 19, 2011 and Mar. 8, 2012) confirming the appeal and service list.
• Not verified: the appearance list on the 2:10-cv-10647 docket itself; any sealed/withdrawn appearances; and the party attribution of the Federal Circuit cc list entries other than Kochanowski. I did not fabricate any names — every attorney above appears in an actual retrieved filing.
• Note the case has since been closed (consolidated action closed March 2011; later vacatur/remand by the Federal Circuit in 2012), and ATI's '516 patent family was assigned to American Vehicular Sciences LLC in April 2012 — so counsel of record should be read as of the litigation period, not present day.

I'll research this case to identify defense counsel. Let me start with several searches.

Let me get the docket details and counsel listings.

Let me try to access the docket directly on CourtListener and Justia.

What I could and could not verify

I was unable to retrieve the PACER docket sheet or the attorney appearance forms for 2:10-cv-10647 in this session — RPX and Ex Parte both surface only the case header (ATI v. General Motors Corp. et al.; filed 2/16/2010; Judge Robert H. Cleland; closed 3/11/2010; 7 defendants; consolidated into 2:08-cv-11048), and neither reproduces ECF entries. So I cannot give you a clean "counsel of record per appearance" list. Below I give (a) the defendants whose counsel is in question, and (b) the only defense-side attorney names I could actually ground, with the source for each and an explicit confidence flag. I did not invent any names.

The parties whose counsel is at issue

Case 2:10-cv-10647 was consolidated with 2:08-cv-11048 (ATI v. Delphi Corp.) for the summary-judgment proceedings, and both cases were appealed together to the Federal Circuit (No. 2011-1292). The consolidated appellee caption in Automotive Technologies Int'l, Inc. v. Delphi Corp. lists the defendant group as: Delphi Corp., Delphi Automotive Systems LLC, DPH Holdings Corp., General Motors Corp., General Motors Co. LLC, General Motors LLC, Ford Motor Co., Volvo Cars of North America, Inc., Hyundai Motor America, Nissan North America, Inc., Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Fuji Heavy Industries USA, Inc. (Subaru), and Motors Liquidation Co.
Source: Fed. Cir. order, Auto. Techs. Int'l v. Delphi Corp., No. 2011-1292 (appeal from consolidated E.D. Mich. Nos. 08-CV-11048 and 10-CV-10647, Judge Cleland) — https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/[624925](/patent/624925)/automotive-technologies-international-v-delphi/

Defense-side attorneys identified (with caveats)

Plaintiff's side (for contrast, not asked): Andrew J. ("Andrew") Kochanowski, Sommers Schwartz, P.C., Southfield, Michigan — appears in the complaint signature block and on all the Federal Circuit cc lists for ATI. Source: complaint excerpt at https://insight.rpxcorp.com/litigation_documents/[2377216](/patent/2377216). ATI's appeal was later dismissed for failure to file an opening brief and the case remanded to vacate a portion of the summary judgment after settlement (Fed. Cir., Mar. 8, 2012).

What I could NOT confirm, and leads I would not rely on

• No appearance forms / no per-defendant lead-counsel designations. I found nothing showing who served as lead counsel for Delphi, GM, Ford, Volvo, Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz, Subaru, or Motors Liquidation in this docket.
• GM-side names that surfaced are from other matters and should not be attributed here. Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP (Robert B. Weiss, Joseph R. Sgroi, Tricia A. Sherick) appears as GM's counsel in the Motors Liquidation bankruptcy (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), and Hogan Lovells/Latham & Watkins names appear in PTAB filings; neither is tied to 2:10-cv-10647 in the sources retrieved.
• The long counsel list in gov.uscourts.mied.266741 (Mitsubishi Electric, NSK, Takata, Valeo, Yazaki, etc.) is a different, much larger E.D. Mich. case — not this one.
• Ford's appellate/PTAB practice is handled by Brooks Kushman P.C. (Andrew B. Turner, John S. LeRoy, Christopher M. Smith), but the source I hit is a 2025 PTAB power-of-attorney for Neo Wireless — not evidence of Ford's counsel in 2010 ATI litigation.

Bottom line

On the record I can source, the only defense attorney I can tie to this consolidated ATI litigation with reasonable confidence is Reginald J. Hill of Jenner & Block (Nissan North America), with Gregory A. Lewis confirmed as Nissan's appellee counsel (firm unverified). Schnorrenberg, Hutchins, and Steadman are on the Federal Circuit service list for the consolidated appeals but I could not map them to a defendant or confirm firms. The remaining eight defendants' district-court counsel are not retrievable from the sources I could reach — they are not sealed as far as I can tell, simply not indexed in the free sources.

To close the gap, the reliable next steps are: (1) pull the PACER docket for 2:08-cv-11048 (the surviving consolidated case) and read the ECF appearance forms and the six summary-judgment motions' signature blocks — those will name lead counsel for each defendant group; (2) check the civil cover sheet/JS-44 and corporate disclosure statements in 2:08-cv-11048; and (3) query Law360/Reuters Legal docket summaries for this case by party name, which typically list lead counsel per defendant.