Emerging Automotive LLC v. General Motors Company et al.

Emerging Automotive LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE), has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against General Motors Company, General Motors Holdings LLC, and Onstar LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Emerging Automotive LLC has no employees, offices, facilities, or revenue, and does not compete with automotive companies, typically seeking monetary damages rather than injunctive relief. The defendants, General Motors Company, General Motors Holdings LLC, and Onstar LLC, are part of a major American multinational automotive manufacturing corporation headquartered in Detroit, Michigan. General Motors (GM) is known for designing, manufacturing, and selling vehicles under brands such as Chevrolet, Buick, GMC, and Cadillac. OnStar Corporation, a subsidiary of General Motors, provides subscription-based telematics services, including communications, in-vehicle security, emergency services, turn-by-turn navigation, and remote diagnostics systems. General Motors Holdings LLC is an organization within General Motors that provides investment capital to develop quality GM dealerships and holds investments in industries like "Electronic And Other Electrical Equipment And Components" and "Business Services".

The lawsuit alleges infringement of U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245. While the specific accused products or services in this particular case are not explicitly detailed in the provided search results, the broader context of Emerging Automotive LLC's litigation patterns against automotive companies suggests the claims likely pertain to in-vehicle technologies. Past lawsuits by NPEs in the automotive sector often target "vehicle services that use GPS and cellular systems to provide emergency services," "automotive GPS navigation systems," and "in-vehicle infotainment systems," which directly align with services provided by OnStar. A related patent (US11975631B2) assigned to Emerging Automotive, LLC describes methods and systems for cloud processing data streamed from a vehicle and a home associated with a user account, involving identifying vehicle location using GPS data, and automatic vehicle navigation to a destination such as a parking spot. Given the nature of OnStar's telematics services, it is highly probable that GM's connected vehicle services, particularly those offered through OnStar, are the allegedly infringing technologies.

The case is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, case number 2:25-cv-00782. The specific judge assigned to this case is not readily available from the provided search snippets, however, this venue has historically been a significant forum for patent litigation. The Eastern District of Texas is known as a "rocket docket" for patent cases, meaning cases are often adjudicated quickly, and it has a reputation for being plaintiff-friendly with specialized local rules for patent cases. Despite the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision in 2017, which aimed to limit forum shopping by restricting corporate residency for venue purposes to the state of incorporation, NPEs continue to file suits in the EDTX by demonstrating that defendants have a "regular and established place of business" there. This case is notable as it represents a continuation of the trend of NPEs targeting the automotive industry for patent infringement, an industry that has seen a "marked increase" in such litigation in recent years as vehicles become increasingly computerized and rely on patented components and software. Furthermore, the mention of parallel IPR proceedings for other patents asserted by Emerging Automotive LLC against other defendants suggests a broader litigation strategy and potential IPR linkages that could influence the outcome of this case.

The patent infringement litigation Emerging Automotive LLC v. General Motors Company et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-00782, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

Important Note on Defendants: While the case caption in the prompt lists General Motors Company, General Motors Holdings LLC, and Onstar LLC as defendants, court records for Case No. 2:25-cv-00782 consistently show the defendants as Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., Toyota Connected North America, Inc., Kia Corporation, and Kia America, Inc.. This summary will reflect the defendants identified in the court dockets associated with the provided case number.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

• Initial Filings and Pleadings:
  • 2025-08-12: Emerging Automotive LLC filed its complaint against Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., and Toyota Connected North America, Inc. (Case No. 2:25-cv-00782).
  • 2025-08-15: Emerging Automotive LLC filed a related complaint against Kia Corporation and Kia America, Inc. (Case No. 2:25-cv-00799).
  • 2025-08-29: An order was granted extending the deadline for defendants to move, answer, or otherwise respond to the complaint up to and including October 17, 2025.
  • 2025-10-28: District Judge Rodney Gilstrap issued a Consolidation Order, consolidating several related cases, including 2:25-cv-00799, for all pretrial issues with Case No. 2:25-cv-00782 as the lead case. Individual cases remain active for trial.
  • 2025-11-07: Emerging Automotive LLC filed an answer to Kia's counterclaims and also an answer to Toyota's counterclaims.
• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:
  • 2025-11-07: A Joint Motion for Extension of Time for Service of Infringement and Invalidity Contentions was filed by Toyota Connected North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
  • 2025-12-10: An order was granted for a Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Discovery Order.
  • 2026-01-02: Toyota filed a Motion to Stay this Action Pending Final Disposition of Asserted Claims Challenged in Proceedings Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
  • 2026-02-06: Emerging Automotive LLC filed a Sur-Reply to the Reply to the Response regarding the Motion to Stay. As of this date, the court had not yet ruled on Toyota's motion to stay.
• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:
  • 2025-12-10: A Markman/Claim Construction Hearing was set for January 19, 2027, at 09:00 AM before District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.
• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:
  • 2025-10-20: Toyota Motor Corporation filed IPR2026-00070 against U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245.
  • 2025-10-21: Toyota Motor Corporation filed IPR2026-00059 against U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245.
  • 2025-10-21: Toyota Motor Corporation also filed PGR2026-00008 against U.S. Patent No. 12,337,715, another patent asserted in this litigation (referred to as "EA2" by the parties, distinguished from an earlier "EA1" litigation involving other patents).
  • 2026-03-23: The PTAB instituted IPR2026-00059 for U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245.
  • The district court litigation is subject to a motion to stay pending the final disposition of these PTAB proceedings. The parties' prior litigation (EA1) involving other patents from the same family (e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 9,171,268; 9,365,188; 10,407,026; 11,396,244; 11,738,659) saw several IPRs resulting in claims being found unpatentable or institution denied, which is referenced in arguments for the current stay motion.
• Present Posture:
  • The case is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. It is consolidated for pretrial issues, with individual cases remaining active for trial. A motion to stay the case pending the outcome of parallel PTAB proceedings is currently under review by the court.

Emerging Automotive LLC is represented by attorneys from Bunsow De Mory LLP.

Marc Belloli

• Role: Lead Counsel (inferred based on extensive patent litigation experience and firm's profile)
• Firm: Bunsow De Mory LLP, Redwood City, CA. The firm also notes having seasoned litigators in Texas.
• Experience Note: Marc Belloli is a trial lawyer focusing on patent litigation and monetization, with experience as lead trial counsel in numerous patent infringement litigations, including securing a $172.5 million jury verdict for Wapp Technologies against Micro Focus. He has litigated cases in various venues across the country, including the Eastern District of Texas.

Elizabeth Day

• Role: Lead Counsel (inferred based on extensive patent litigation experience and firm's profile)
• Firm: Bunsow De Mory LLP, Redwood City, CA. The firm also notes having seasoned litigators in Texas.
• Experience Note: Elizabeth Day is an experienced trial lawyer specializing in patent infringement litigation and other intellectual property disputes. She has managed and tried numerous complex cases across diverse technological areas and has served as first chair/lead lawyer in dozens of matters, including in the Eastern District of Texas, where her work includes a $172.5 million verdict. She is also recognized for handling the damages aspects of cases and has over 25 years of IP litigation experience.

Based on the provided case number and court, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas case 2:25-cv-00782, the defendant(s) listed in the prompt are General Motors Company, General Motors Holdings LLC, and Onstar LLC. However, a review of publicly available court documents, including a filing with the USPTO related to patent 11,104,245, indicates that the defendant in Civil Action No. 2:25-cv-00782-JRG is Toyota Motor Corp., et al., not General Motors Company et al..

Therefore, counsel of record for General Motors Company, General Motors Holdings LLC, and Onstar LLC in case 2:25-cv-00782 cannot be identified as they do not appear to be defendants in this specific case number.

Note: In a separate, but related, patent infringement case in the Eastern District of Texas, Communication Advances, LLC v. General Motors Co., LLC (Case No. 2:23-cv-00494), General Motors was represented by:

• David J. Thomas (Partner) of Honigman LLP.
• Dennis J. Abdelnour (Partner) of Honigman LLP.
• J. Michael Huget (Partner) of Honigman LLP.
• Shaun William Hassett (Attorney) of Honigman LLP.
• Additional support was provided by Potter Minton PC. Potter Minton is a firm known for intellectual property litigation, frequently serving as local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas.