Mel NavIP, LLC v. Toyota Motor, Corp. et al.
Infringement action filed 16 May 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 28 Apr 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: consent judgment.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US8060368B2US9239829B2US8649971B2US8244465B2
- Case no.
- 2:22-cv-00152
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- E.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- Rodney Gilstrap
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 16 May 2022 – 28 Apr 2023
- Duration
- 347 days
- Basis of termination
- Consent Judgment
- Products & marks
- Navigation device · Navigation system and display method of road network on the same system · Speech recognition apparatus · Speech recognition device
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Speech recognition apparatus
A voice recognition apparatus 10, which performs voice recognition of an input voice by referring to a voice recognition dictionary and outputs a voice recognition result, has an external information acquiring section 14 for acquiring from externally connected devices 20–1–20-N connected thereto a type of each externally connected device, and for acquiring data recorded in each externally connected device; a vocabulary extracting analyzing section 15 and 16 for extracting a vocabulary item from the data as an extracted vocabulary item, and for producing analysis data by analyzing the extracted vocabulary item and by providing the extracted vocabulary item with reading; and a dictionary generating section 17 for storing the analysis data in the voice recognition dictionary corresponding to the type. For each type of the externally connected devices, one of the voice recognition dictionaries 13–1–13-N is assigned.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 15 Nov 2011
- Earliest priority
- 7 Dec 2005
- Est. expiry
- 10 Jan 2029
- Validity challenges
- 2 on recordIPR2023-00083 · Patentability · filed by Unified Patents LLC90019326 · EPR
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- OSAWA, MASANOBU · OKADA, REIKO · EBIHARA, TAKASHI
- Classification
- G10L15/06G10L15/18
- Prosecution counsel
- Ni, Wang & Massand, PLLC
- Examiner
- AZAD, ABUL K
Speech recognition device
A speech recognition device includes: a speech recognition unit 23a that performs speech recognition for input speech; a reading information conversion data base in which a reading information conversion rule L is registered; a reading information conversion unit 27a that converts reading information of the word among the languages based on the rule L; and a speech recognition control unit 24a that performs control such that, when a word in a different language that is different from a predetermined language is included in a recognition subject vocabulary in which a speech recognition unit 23a refers to recognition subject word information E, the unit 27a converts the reading information in the different language into reading information in the predetermined language, and that the unit 23a performs the speech recognition that makes reference to the recognition subject word information of the corresponding word, including the converted reading information in the predetermined language.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 19 Jan 2016
- Est. expiry
- 20 Dec 2031
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- KATO, YOICHI · ISHII, JUN · SAKASHITA, HIROKI
- Classification
- G06F17/28G10L15/00G10L15/26G10L15/06
- Prosecution counsel
- Ni, Wang & Massand, PLLC
- Examiner
- VO, HUYEN
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
Mel NavIP, LLC
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Andrey Belenky · Brandon Gregory Moore · Dmitry Kheyfits · Hanna Glomska Cohen
- Firm
- Kheyfits Belenky LLP
Toyota Motor, Corp.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Fadi N Kiblawi · John Frank Rabena · Melissa Richards Smith · Tyler Del Rosario · William H. Mandir · Yoshinari Kishimoto
- Firm
- Gillam & Smith, LLP, Sughrue Mion PLLC – DC
- Also named
- Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc. · Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Andrey Belenky | Mel NavIP, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Brandon Gregory Moore | Mel NavIP, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Dmitry Kheyfits | Mel NavIP, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Hanna Glomska Cohen | Mel NavIP, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Fadi N Kiblawi | Toyota Motor, Corp. | Defendant |
| John Frank Rabena | Toyota Motor, Corp. | Defendant |
| Melissa Richards Smith | Toyota Motor, Corp. | Defendant |
| Tyler Del Rosario | Toyota Motor, Corp. | Defendant |
| William H. Mandir | Toyota Motor, Corp. | Defendant |
| Yoshinari Kishimoto | Toyota Motor, Corp. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the Court is the Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal (the “Stipulation”) filed by Plaintiff Mel NavIP LLC (“Mel NavIP”) and Defendants Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (together, “Toyota”). (Dkt. No. 41.) The Stipulation states that the parties voluntarily dismiss all claims in this action without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Stipulation, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims asserted in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE the above-captioned case as no parties or claims remain.”
Case 2:22-cv-00152 · E.D. Tex. · closed 28 April 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 2:22-cv-00152?
2:22-cv-00152 is a patent infringement action brought by Mel NavIP, LLC against Toyota Motor, Corp., filed on 16 May 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 28 April 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 2:22-cv-00152?
US8060368B2 (“Speech recognition apparatus”), assigned to OPTIMUM VECTOR DYNAMICS LLC, currently active; US9239829B2 (“Speech recognition device”), assigned to OPTIMUM VECTOR DYNAMICS LLC, currently active; US8649971B2 (“Navigation device”), assigned to OPTIMUM VECTOR DYNAMICS LLC; US8244465B2 (“Navigation system and display method of road network on the same system”), assigned to OPTIMUM VECTOR DYNAMICS LLC. The record also lists Navigation device, Navigation system and display method of road network on the same system, Speech recognition apparatus and Speech recognition device.
How was case 2:22-cv-00152 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is consent judgment. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal (the “Stipulation”) filed by Plaintiff Mel NavIP LLC (“Mel NavIP”) and Defendants Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (together, “Toyota”). (Dkt. No. 41.) The Stipulation states that the parties voluntarily dismiss all claims in this action without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Stipulation, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDG
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 2:22-cv-00152 take?
347 calendar days, from filing on 16 May 2022 to closure on 28 April 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:22-cv-00152?
Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap presided. Andrey Belenky, Brandon Gregory Moore, Dmitry Kheyfits and Hanna Glomska Cohen are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Mel NavIP. Fadi N Kiblawi, John Frank Rabena, Melissa Richards Smith, Tyler Del Rosario, William H. Mandir and Yoshinari Kishimoto appear for defendant Toyota Motor.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:22-cv-00152 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.