Back in April, Tesla filed a lawsuit against Fisker Automotive for allegedly stealing insider information having to do with the production of an electric vehicle. You may recall that Henrik Fisker was hired to style the Tesla Whitestar sedan, though his designs were ultimately rejected. About a month later, word spread that Fisker had asked to have the lawsuit enter arbitration, and a hearing was set for June 11. Fast forward to today, and the hearing apparently took place as planned and court documents show that Fisker's request for arbitration was granted.

Interestingly, those documents also reveal that the deal between Tesla and Fisker had a clause requiring the arbitration of any disagreements in a specific court. It appears that Tesla Motors went outside those terms by suing Fisker in a different court than was initially agreed upon. Not surprisingly, Henrik Fisker is "extremely pleased" with this outcome. Regardless of how things proceed between the two companies from this point forward, we can be hopeful that each company is able to bring a desirable and suitably green vehicle to market. Thanks for the tip, Doug!

[Source: CNET]

As we've just recently wrote, Toyota has been ordered to pay the very hefty sum of $4.3 million to Paice LLC for patent infringement related to its Hybrid Synergy Drive. At that time, we mentioned that Solomon Technologies had also sued Toyota regarding its hybrid vehicle technology and was appealing a previous ruling that Toyota did not infringe on one of its patents. There is good news this time for Toyota, as Solomon's appeal was denied by a three-judge panel. Solomon still believes that its patent was indeed infringed upon and claims that they "remain as determined as ever to defend our intellectual property fully and completely," according to Peter W. DeVecchis, President of Solomon Technologies. Solomon had asked that Toyota be forced to stop importing vehicles such as the hot-selling Prius, Camry and Highlander Hybrid models. Solomon has yet to determine whether or not it will continue forward with this particular case, as you can see in the press release pasted after the jump.

Toyota finally seems to be out of options now that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed a lower court's ruling to stand which will award Paice LLC roughly $4.3 million in an hybrid technology lawsuit. That amount works out to $25 for every vehicle that Toyota has sold which uses the Hybrid Synergy Drive. According to the lawsuit, Toyota made use of a microprocessor which accepts torque information from the electric motor and internal combustion engine. Fortunately for Toyota, though, the ruling does not preclude the Japanese auto-giant from continuing production and sales of their super-popular hybrid vehicles, which would, of course, include the Prius. There were three patents in question, though only one of Paice's patents was ruled to be infringed upon. For the record, there are two other possible hurdles for Toyota and their hybrid technology, one from Solomon Technologies and the other from a seventy-five year old engineer in Seattle named Conrad Gardner.

[Source: The Detroit News]

The 2004 decision by the city of Elk Grove to purchase refurbished buses with gasoline/electric hybrid drivetrains from ISE and Complete Coach Works sure hasn't panned out as well as had been hoped. With the noble intention of being the first U.S. city with an all-hybrid bus fleet, Elk Grove officials purchased 21 of the buses for around $10 million. According to a spokesperson for the city's contract maintenance company, MV Transportation of Fairfield, "Those buses immediately began having problems." After experiencing leaking in the rain, loss of air conditioning, and some buses that completely stopped working, the fire that happened in September of 2007 was the last straw. It was then that the buses (pictured above) were pulled from service and parked behind a grassy knoll.

Although hotly contested by the manufacturers, the city claims there were actually four fires and 25-30 "thermal incidents." Vice President Justin Spragg of ISE Corp contends that there were only three fires and that they were not all related to the ultra-capacitor used in the hybrid design. According to the article in the Sacramento Bee, he also stated that there were far fewer than the 25 "thermal incidents" claimed by the city. President Macy Neshati of Complete Coach Works is quoted as saying, "I think we're aware of a couple of instances that would be properly described as a thermal incident but 'fire' is like flames and evacuation and buses burning to the ground. We certainly haven't had that." The manufacturers place the blame at the feet of the maintenance company while the city appears to have plans to try to recoup their initial $10 million investment from all parties through legal action. For all the details on this refurbished hybrid bus hullabaloo click "read".

[Source: Sacbee]

This is not the first time that the topic of hot gas has appeared on our pages, and it;s not likely to be the last either. The problem, depending on who's side your own, is that gas expands as it increases in temperature. In summer months, it is possible that consumers are getting less gas in their tanks than they are paying for. Before all of the lawsuits were compiled into one class-action suit, there were privately filed suits in 26 states, Washington, D.C., and Guam. The now-single-suit claims that gas is, on average, 10 degrees hotter than the 60 degrees that gas companies calibrate their pumps at. Not only that, but consumers also claim that the gas companies make extra money by adjusting their numbers when it comes time to pay government taxes, but not when it comes time to charge consumers.

There are good arguments on both sides of this issue, and the gas companies claim they are just following procedures which are required by law. No decisions have been made regarding this issue in court, but U.S. District Judge Kathryn Vratil has ruled that the lawsuit shall proceed on its way to trial.

[Source: MSNBC]

The war of words between the Mayor of London and Porsche is heating up. Thanks to Mayor Ken Livingstone (the guy in the black Prius), London's congestion charge will be increased, a move that sparked the threat of a lawsuit and even the creation of a website by automaker Porsche. At a news conference today, Mayor Ken Livingstone said "they [Porsche] should be redoubling efforts to produce less-polluting cars" and notes that Berliners would be annoyed "if a British company tried to intervene in a mayoral election" (remember, Porsche is a German company).

Livingstone is standing for his third term May 1 and, wouldn't you know it, his two opponents don't support the fee increases. Porsche spokesman Andrew Davis says they "are not interested in the election at all -- we're not a political company. ... We are simply fighting on the issue of modifying the congestion charge." I don't know Porsche, this web page and this one look a little political to me.

[Source: Bloomberg]

Just two weeks after the EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson turned down California's request for a waiver allowing the state to regulate greenhouse gases, things are moving to court. California has followed trough on their promise to take the EPA to court by filing suit in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The grounds for the suit is that the EPA failed to adequately explain the reasons for denying the waiver. If California's regulations are allowed to go ahead it would effectively mandate a fleet fuel economy average of 44 mpg by 2020, significantly more than the 35mpg required by the recently passed federal energy bill. Fifteen other states have also adopted or are in the process of taking on California's environmental regulations. The Bush administration and the automakers will obviously be fighting this lawsuit vigorously because, after all, the last thing anyone in this administration wants to do is explain their actions.

[Source: Detroit News]

Big legal news out of California today. A federal judge has just ruled that the State of California does have the right to regulate vehicles' greenhouse gas emissions. This decision goes against the automakers' wishes. They prefer that the federal government set national standards. Naturally, it is easier for them to build a car that can meet national standards and then be sold anywhere in the U.S.

Here's AP writer Samantha Young:

[The automakers] argued that a federal energy law passed in 1975 gives the U.S. Department of Transportation sole jurisdiction over fuel economy. But [Judge] Ishii rejected that claim, saying Congress gave California and the EPA the authority to regulate vehicle emissions, even if those rules are more strict than those imposed by the federal government.

If this ruling stands, and California get a waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to enforce the state's emissions standards, then the automakers might have to design and build a variety of cars and powerplants to meet each state's standards. In California, the AP reminds us, those standards were set in 2004 and call for a roughly 30 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2016. The EPA has said it will decide before the end of the year if that waiver will be approved.

I wonder if U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Ishii will now become a bit of a hero to some in the environmental movement, as it was his decision that California Attorney General Jerry Brown is calling "a major victory and a giant step forward for California." Brown is also involved in the suit that is asking the federal government to limit emissions on oceangoing ships. More news to come on this, without a doubt.

Related:

• California and environmental groups to sue EPA over emissions rules
• Judge dismisses California greenhouse nuisance lawsuit

[Source: Samantha Young / Associated Press]

The State of California sued the EPA over failing to act on a tailpipe emissions waiver request. Fourteen other states will join California in the suit as interveners including Massachusetts, New York, Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Pennsylvania. California Air Resources Board filed the waiver on December 21, 2005 and six months ago they warned they would sue. You can watch the video announcing the suit at Governor Schwarzenegger's website.

[Source: Office of the Governor]

Paice LLC sued Toyota in 2004 over three patents Paice said Toyota infringed with their hybrid drive train. The court ruled, in a jury verdict at a Texas court known for patent cases, that Toyota did infringe on one of the three patents and Toyota had to pay $25 per infringing car (Prius II, Toyota Highlander hybrid and Lexus RX400H) or $4.23 M. The court also ruled Toyota did not have to stop making cars that infringed on Paice's patents. Today, Bloomberg reported that the appeals court reaffirmed the ruling but did ask the lower court to revisit the reason for the $25 damages for every infringing car sold. Both companies appealed to a higher court.

[Source: Reuters]

John True, professional jazz piano player from California, has filed a class action lawsuit against American Honda Motor Co. for misleading mileage claims of the Honda Civic Hybrid. The question that this suit seems to revolve around is whether or not Honda misled consumers with inflated mileage claims. Did Honda imply that it is possible to get 49 miles per gallon in the city and 51 mpg on the highway? Is it impossible to meet those figures? Those are the questions that will be considered in the suit. Sage Marie, speaking on behalf of Honda, said that the "vast majority of Civic Hybrid customers are satisfied with the performance since it delivers consistently and substantially higher numbers than comparable non hybrid vehicles in the real world. It is possible to attain the EPA estimates, and customers do all the time."

John True was only able to average 32 miles per gallon, which is WAY below the EPA's old estimates. You may recall that the EPA has changed the way that they do their testing to better reflect what drivers are likely to achieve in real life. Another question that the suit will attempt to answer was whether Honda knew that their car would not average what the EPA tests showed. If they knew that the car was not going to get those numbers, should they base their advertising around them? Also, some have suggested that Honda and Toyota may have written the software of the vehicles to perform well in the old EPA tests. If that is true, does it seem unethical to anybody? Remember, though, that nothing of this sort has been proven.

This may very well be the first time a manufacturer has been sued over unrealistic mileage claims. If this one is successful, it would not be shocking to see more like it in the future.

UPDATE: Read AutoblogGreen's exclusive interview with John True here.

Related:

• EPA does something about unrealistic mileage figures for new autos
• Your mileage will vary. On the new MPG estimates coming in 2008

[Source: The Detroit News]

Regarding the lawsuit by car makers to try and stop states from individually regulating carbon dioxide emissions, U.S. District Court Judge William Sessions has ruled that a trial can start next Tuesday to stop the CO2 regulations that have been enacted in California from being enforced. Ten other states have opted to follow the California rules since the EPA has so far declined to regulate greenhouse gases. After the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions, the agency said the states can impose regulations.

Related:

• US Supreme Court rules that EPA can regulate greenhouse gases
• Automakers must present CO2 emissions data in public, judge says

[Source: Detroit News]

The National Association of Manufacturers has posted a couple of responses to the lawsuit filed by California attorney general Bill Lockyer yesterday, and they are not happy. They are accusing Lockyer of grandstanding and trying to bypass legislation by litigating. The association issued a press release that opens with:

The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) criticized California's attorney general today for issuing a lawsuit against automakers for damages related to greenhouse gas emissions, calling the endeavor an "appalling misuse" of the California court system to force public policy changes.

"This is a blatant attempt by the California attorney general to get back-door regulation through manipulation of the courts," said NAM President John Engler. "Already, manufacturers are dealing with some of the highest legal and energy costs in the world, we shouldn't be making matters worse with unwarranted lawsuits.

"While our nation is in the midst of an energy crisis, lawmakers should be looking for environmentally safe and economically sound solutions, not posturing with litigation," Engler added.

While former Michigan Governer John Engler rips the California AG for his "posturing" he neglects to mention that attempts by California and other states have been fought constantly in the courts and the Federal Government has done absolutely nothing about increasing efficiency and emissions standards for at least two decades. Lockyer probably doesn't have a viable case to fight, but he is certainly making a statement. The North-East States and California want do something about pollution and fuel economy, so maybe NAM and the auto companies should sit down and work something out. Read more from NAM here and here.

[Source: National Association of Manufacturers]