IBJNews

Dispute over vehicle 'spy' device patent flashes into court

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Carmel company that markets a device which plugs into a car’s diagnostic port to monitor the vehicle's performance has filed a patent-infringement lawsuit against a better-known competitor.

CarCheckup LLC alleges that Irvine, Calif.-based CarMD.com Corp. infringed on two of its patents and seeks triple damages in a suit filed June 28 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

CarCheckup cites two patents it filed in 2004 and 2005. The local company didn’t bring its product to market until recent years, however. It sells the product through its website for about $150.

CarMD has a better-known retail presence and its products can be found on shelves at Pep Boys stores. It also sells its vehicle diagnostic devices through Amazon.com, on the Home Shopping Network and via infomercials.

The lawsuit does not specify exactly how CarMD allegedly infringes on CarCheckup’s patents or on how it allegedly has dinged its business. Both company’s products plug into a vehicle’s diagnostic port and upload data to a customer’s personal computer.

The founder and CEO of CarCheckup, Jennifer Funkhouser, did not return phone calls seeking comment.

It’s not clear how many units her company has sold or whether it has had any success getting onto shelves of mass-market retailers.
 
Defendant CarMD has been around since the 1990s. CarCheckup was founded in 2002.

"We have received the complaint and are currently reviewing the matter. We are confident of a favorable outcome, but cannot comment any further while the matter remains pending,” said CarMD CEO Ieon C. Chen.

Onboard diagnostic devices first surfaced for mechanic use decades ago as automakers started cramming more electronics under the hood.

After the more-capable OBD II diagnostic system was installed by automakers in the mid-1990s, numerous companies hit the market with diagnostic readers that plug into a port under the dashboard.

Funkhouser’s device stemmed from a project for a class at Indiana University taught by serial technology entrepreneur Scott Jones, who heads Carmel-based ChaCha Search Inc.

Her CarCheckup device found favor with real estate agents needing to track data such as miles traveled and trip and time duration. It also showed potential in fleet-vehicle management.

One curious use is in tracking teen driving behavior by monitoring speed and how hard a car accelerates and brakes.

Like competitor CarMD, Funkhouser’s device also retrieves trouble codes stored onboard to catch hidden vehicle problems.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT