December 23, 2011

SmartDrive files antitrust counterclaims for "sham litigation" and trade secrets violations by DriveCam

SmartDrive Systems, a leader in fleet safety and operational efficiency, today announced that it has filed counterclaims for antitrust and trade secrets violations by DriveCam, Inc. SmartDrive filed counterclaims in United States District Court for the Southern District of California on December 20, 2011 asserting that DriveCam violated the Sherman Act by engaging in "sham litigation" for economic advantage, unfair competitive business practices, as well as misappropriation of SmartDrive trade secrets, among other counterclaims.

SmartDrive also announced this week that after a reexamination request by SmartDrive, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued an Office action rejecting all claims of DriveCam’s U.S. Patent No. 7,804,426 as unpatentable over multiple prior art references. The Patent Office also rejected as unpatentable all claims for which reexamination were sought in DriveCam’s U.S. Patent No. 6,389,340. The claims rejected by the Patent Office include all of the claims in these patents asserted by DriveCam against SmartDrive in the pending lawsuit.

SmartDrive’s President Jason Palmer stated, “We firmly believe that DriveCam has engaged in anticompetitive behavior designed to harm SmartDrive. In our view, SmartDrive offers innovative solutions meeting customers’ needs. The marketplace should be free from anticompetitive conduct so that customers can have every opportunity to decide which solution best meets their needs for state of the art technology as well as customer service. Fair competition is the lifeblood of our economy.”

Regarding the Patent Office’s recent actions, Mr. Palmer stated “We are satisfied that the USPTO rejected the patent claims asserted by DriveCam in its infringement suit. The prior art cited by the Patent Office establishes that those patents never should have been granted to DriveCam in the first place.”

| SmartDrive