DCT

2:25-cv-00782

Emerging Automotive LLC v. Toyota Motor North America Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:25-cv-00782, E.D. Tex., 08/12/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendants maintain a regular and established place of business in the district, specifically citing Toyota's headquarters in Plano, Texas, and have not contested venue in prior legal actions in the same court.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s connected vehicle services, including Remote Connect, Digital Key, and user profile systems, infringe three patents related to the cloud-based sharing of electronic vehicle keys and the transfer of user settings between vehicles.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue involves connected vehicle platforms that use cloud servers and mobile devices to manage vehicle access and user experience, a field of increasing importance as automobiles become more integrated with digital ecosystems.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Defendants have not contested personal jurisdiction or venue in the Eastern District of Texas in prior actions, which may be intended to preemptively address potential preliminary motions on these grounds.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2011-04-22 Priority Date for ’245, ’715, and ’716 Patents
2019-08-01 Date of Toyota Connected "Digital Key" Case Study cited in complaint
2021-08-31 U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245 Issues
2023-05-17 Date of Lexus "Digital Key" instructional video cited in complaint
2025-06-24 U.S. Patent No. 12,337,715 Issues
2025-06-24 U.S. Patent No. 12,337,716 Issues
2025-08-12 Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245 - "Vehicles and Cloud Systems for Sharing E-Keys to Access and Use Vehicles"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,104,245, "Vehicles and Cloud Systems for Sharing E-Keys to Access and Use Vehicles," issued August 31, 2021 (’245 Patent). (Compl. ¶10).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent's background section notes the advancement of technology allowing for "better wireless interfacing and networking with vehicles," creating a context for new methods of vehicle access and control beyond traditional physical keys (’245 Patent, col. 2:7-11).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a vehicle system that communicates with a cloud server to grant access via an electronic key (e-key). A user's mobile device obtains a "unique access code" from the server and sends a request to the vehicle; the vehicle then authenticates this request with the server. If validated, the vehicle provides the mobile device with an e-key that enables unlocking and starting, with the user's permissions governed by privileges associated with the access code (’245 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:30-56). This allows a vehicle owner to grant temporary, controlled access to others, as depicted in a figure showing e-keys being shared with a valet, guest, and neighbor (’245 Patent, Fig. 29).
  • Technical Importance: The described technology provides a framework for secure, manageable digital vehicle access, which is foundational for modern car-sharing services, remote vehicle management, and granting temporary credentials to third parties.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶11).
  • The essential elements of claim 1 include:
    • A vehicle with an on-board computer.
    • A first system for unlocking the vehicle and a second system for starting the vehicle, both interfaced with the computer.
    • Communications circuitry for communicating with a server and a mobile device.
    • The circuitry is configured to receive "coded data" from the mobile device containing a "unique access code" obtained from the server.
    • This access code is associated with "privileges" set via the server in response to a "restriction" set by a vehicle administrator.
    • A camera is used for "capturing video of an area that includes the vehicle" while the access code is active.
    • The access code functions as an e-key managed via a graphical user interface on the mobile device.
  • The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more claims," reserving the right to assert others (Compl. ¶11).

U.S. Patent No. 12,337,715 - "Methods and Systems For Sharing e-Keys To Access Vehicles"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,337,715, "Methods and Systems For Sharing e-Keys To Access Vehicles," issued June 24, 2025 (’715 Patent). (Compl. ¶22).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the need for a structured and secure method for vehicle owners to grant temporary electronic access to others, moving beyond physical key exchanges (’715 Patent, col. 2:11-18).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a method for sharing e-keys where a request is initiated from a "sharing device" (e.g., the owner's phone) to a "recipient device." The method involves processing and validating the request, securely generating the e-key, and registering it with a manufacturer's server. The e-key is then enabled for use on the recipient's device, subject to a "privilege level" that dictates the conditions of use, such as time limits or geographic boundaries (’715 Patent, Abstract; col. 3:23-4:2).
  • Technical Importance: This system provides a methodology for peer-to-peer sharing of vehicle access, which is a critical function for both formal car-sharing platforms and informal vehicle lending among individuals.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 23 (Compl. ¶23).
  • The essential elements of system claim 23 include:
    • An on-board computer in a vehicle.
    • A communications system for interfacing with a server.
    • The server is configured to interface with an application.
    • The application provides a user interface for "initiating a request to share the e-key."
    • The request is initiated using a "message communicated to the recipient device."
    • The system processes the request to "enable generation of the e-key" for the recipient device to use.
  • The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more claims," reserving the right to assert others (Compl. ¶23).

U.S. Patent No. 12,337,716 - "Systems For Transferring User Profiles Between Vehicles Using Cloud Services"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,337,716, "Systems For Transferring User Profiles Between Vehicles Using Cloud Services," issued June 24, 2025 (’716 Patent). (Compl. ¶34).

Technology Synopsis

The patent addresses the inconvenience of drivers having to manually adjust vehicle settings (e.g., seat position, climate, radio presets) when moving between different cars (’716 Patent, col. 2:45-56). The patented solution is a cloud-based system that stores a user's personalized profile and automatically transfers those settings to a vehicle upon user verification, creating a consistent user experience across multiple vehicles (’716 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts at least independent claim 7 (Compl. ¶35).

Accused Features

The complaint accuses Toyota's cloud services system, including servers that implement Remote Connect and/or Drive Connect, of infringing by receiving, storing, and communicating user profile information to remotely program Toyota and Lexus vehicles (Compl. ¶35).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentalities are "Toyota and Lexus-branded vehicles that include Remote Connect and Remote Connect with Digital Key," as well as the underlying "cloud services system including a server" that enables these features (Compl. ¶¶11, 35).

Functionality and Market Context

The accused services allow vehicle owners to use a mobile device as a "Digital Key" to access and operate their vehicle and to share this digital access with other drivers (Compl. ¶¶11, 14). The complaint alleges that Toyota actively markets these subscription-based services and provides extensive instructional materials, such as YouTube videos and online support guides, to encourage customer use (Compl. ¶¶14, 26, 38). It is also alleged that data collected through these services is used for Toyota's broader "Mobility Services Platform" and shared with third parties, such as insurance and rental car companies (Compl. ¶¶7, 12, 17, 18).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references claim chart exhibits that are not provided. The narrative infringement theories are summarized below.

11,104,245 Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that Toyota's accused vehicles directly infringe claim 1 of the ’245 Patent (Compl. ¶11). The theory suggests that the vehicles contain the claimed on-board computer, unlocking/starting systems, and communications circuitry that connects to Toyota's cloud servers and a user's mobile device running the Toyota App (Compl. ¶11). The "Digital Key" feature is alleged to be the claimed "unique access code," which is associated with privileges defined by the vehicle administrator (e.g., sharing the key with a guest) (Compl. ¶14). The complaint does not, however, present specific factual allegations mapping the accused products to the claim limitation requiring a "camera... for capturing video" while the access code is active.

12,337,715 Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that Toyota's system for sharing digital keys infringes claim 23 of the ’715 Patent (Compl. ¶23). The infringement theory posits that the combination of the vehicle's on-board computer, Toyota's cloud servers, and the Toyota App on a mobile device constitutes the claimed system (Compl. ¶23). It is alleged that the Toyota App provides the user interface for an owner to initiate a request to share a Digital Key with another driver by sending a message, and that Toyota's servers process this request to enable the e-key on the recipient's device, thereby meeting the claim elements (Compl. ¶26).

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: A primary question for the ’245 Patent infringement analysis is whether the complaint provides a basis for alleging the "camera... for capturing video" limitation. A potential defense could focus on the absence of any alleged link between the accused Digital Key feature and the operation of a vehicle camera as required by the claim.
  • Technical Questions: For both the ’245 and ’715 Patents, the analysis may focus on the technical operation of Toyota's Digital Key system. Key questions may include whether Toyota's system "generates" a "unique access code" for each sharing transaction, as recited in the claims, or whether it employs an alternative method, such as authorizing a pre-existing vehicle credential for a new user's device.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The Term: "unique access code" ('245 Patent, claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: The infringement reading for the ’245 Patent hinges on whether Toyota's "Digital Key" constitutes a "unique access code." The construction of this term will be critical; a narrow definition requiring, for example, a newly generated cryptographic key for every use could create a significant dispute if the accused system operates differently. Practitioners may focus on this term because its definition will determine if the architecture of the accused Digital Key system falls within the claim scope.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification illustrates "Generating of Unique Codes" as a process potentially separate from "Assigning E-Keys," which could support an interpretation where a code is unique upon generation and can be assigned from a pool, not necessarily generated anew for every single request (’245 Patent, Fig. 34).
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The summary of the invention states the "server is configured to generate a unique access code for the request," which could be interpreted to require that a new code is generated specifically in response to each sharing request (’245 Patent, col. 2:63-65).

The Term: "enable generation of the e-key" ('715 Patent, claim 23)

  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the accused method. The dispute may turn on whether Toyota's system "generates" a new e-key for a recipient or merely authorizes that recipient's device to use a credential already associated with the vehicle. A broad construction might cover authorization, while a narrow one would require the creation of a new digital key.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The abstract describes a process where a request is processed to "enable[] the e-key for use on the vehicle by the recipient device," suggesting the critical step is the act of enabling access for the recipient, which may not require the creation of a new cryptographic object (’715 Patent, Abstract).
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The same abstract also refers to "generating the e-key securely by the sharing device," which may support an interpretation that a distinct creation event must occur in response to the sharing request, rather than a simple authorization of an existing credential (’715 Patent, Abstract).

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all three asserted patents. Inducement is based on allegations that Toyota provides extensive instructional materials, including its public websites, YouTube videos, and support articles, that actively encourage and instruct customers to use the accused Digital Key and User Profile features in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶¶14, 26, 38). Contributory infringement is alleged on the basis that the components enabling these features are material to the invention, especially made for infringing use, and are not staple articles of commerce (Compl. ¶¶16, 28, 40).

Willful Infringement

Willfulness is alleged for all three patents based on post-suit knowledge. The complaint asserts that, at a minimum, Toyota has had knowledge of the patents since the date the complaint was filed and served, and that its continued infringing conduct despite this knowledge is willful (Compl. ¶¶15, 19, 27, 31, 39, 43).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A core issue will be one of evidentiary sufficiency and claim scope: particularly for the ’245 Patent, what evidence will demonstrate that Toyota's vehicles use a camera to capture video during the active period of a Digital Key, as explicitly required by claim 1? The complaint’s current factual allegations appear to omit this element, suggesting a potential focal point for non-infringement arguments.
  • A key technical question will be one of operational correspondence: does the architecture of Toyota's accused Digital Key system function by "generating" a "unique" e-key or access code for each sharing request, as the claim language may require, or does it operate through a fundamentally different authorization mechanism? The outcome of this question will likely depend on expert testimony regarding the inner workings of Toyota’s cloud platform and vehicle software.
  • A final question will relate to damages and commercial context: given the allegations that Toyota uses data from the accused connected services for its broader "Mobility Services Platform" and shares it with third parties, a central theme may become valuing the patented technology not just for its direct function but also for its role as a data-gathering tool within Toyota's larger business strategy.