Patent 8315769
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-pro
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged through Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review at the USPTO. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs.
Cases on file (8)
Group view →Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8315769. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Tesla, Inc.filed Oct 1, 20252:25-cv-00999Texas Eastern District Courtterminated Jan 29, 2026Dismissed without prejudice
Defendants: Tesla, Inc.
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Suzuki Motor Corporationfiled Apr 23, 20252:25-cv-00429Texas Eastern District CourtActive
Defendants: Suzuki Motor Corporation
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Jaguar Land Rover Automotive PLCfiled Dec 9, 20242:24-cv-01013Texas Eastern District Courtterminated Jun 11, 2025Dismissed with prejudice
Defendants: Jaguar Land Rover Automotive PLC
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Volvo Car USA LLCfiled Mar 8, 20242:24-cv-02021New Jersey District CourtClosed
Defendants: Volvo Car USA LLC
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Subaru of America, Inc.filed Mar 4, 20241:24-cv-00961Georgia Northern District CourtClosed
Defendants: Subaru of America, Inc.
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC et al.filed Sep 8, 20223:22-cv-01349California Southern District CourtActive
Defendants: Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC and Mercedes-Benz Group AG
- Vision Works IP Corp. v. Nissan North American Inc.filed Mar 4, 20223:22-cv-00301California Southern District CourtClosed
Defendants: Nissan North American Inc.
- 2:21-cv-01173Washington Western District Court
Defendants: Polaris, Inc.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Litigation History of U.S. Patent 8,315,769
Contrary to the previously generated summary, which found no litigation, U.S. Patent 8,315,769 has been asserted in numerous legal disputes. The plaintiff in all identified cases is Vision Works IP Corp. The patent is frequently litigated alongside other patents in the assignee's portfolio.
Details of the known litigation are as follows:
| Case Number | Jurisdiction | Defendant(s) | Filing Date | Status/Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2:25-cv-00999 | Texas Eastern District Court | Tesla, Inc. | 2025-10-01 | Dismissed without prejudice on 2026-01-29. |
| 2:25-cv-00429 | Texas Eastern District Court | Suzuki Motor Corp. | 2025-04-23 | Open/Ongoing. This is the lead consolidated case. |
| 2:24-cv-01013 | Texas Eastern District Court | Jaguar Land Rover Automotive PLC | 2024-12-09 | Ongoing as of early 2025. |
| 2:24-cv-02021 | New Jersey District Court | Volvo Car USA LLC | 2024-03-08 | Closed. |
| 1:24-cv-00961 | Georgia Northern District Court | Subaru of America, Inc. | 2024-03-04 | Closed. |
| 3:22-cv-01349 | California Southern District Court | Mercedes-Benz Group AG, Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC | 2022-09-08 | Closed. |
| 3:22-cv-00301 | California Southern District Court | Nissan North American Inc. | 2022-03-04 | Closed. |
| 2:21-cv-01173 | Washington Western District Court | Horatio Washington Depot Technologies LLC, et al. | 2021-09-01 | Closed. Note: Initial case appears to be styled GLEASON & ASSOCIATES PC v. HORATIO WASHINGTON DEPOT TECHNOLOGIES LLC et al. |
| 3:21-cv-01565 | California Southern District Court | Polaris Inc. | 2021-09-03 | Closed. |
Post-Grant Proceedings
In addition to the district court litigation, U.S. Patent 8,315,769 has been the subject of post-grant review at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
- Ex Parte Reexamination: On March 25, 2026, Unified Patents filed an ex parte reexamination proceeding against the patent. On April 15, 2026, the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) granted the request, finding "substantial new questions of patentability" for the challenged claims. This proceeding challenges the validity of the patent based on prior art and other patentability requirements. The reexamination was initiated in response to the patent's assertion against numerous entities in the automotive industry.
Generated 4/30/2026, 8:39:08 PM