Honeywell Aerospace US LLC filed Honeywell Aerospace US LLC v. Rivian Automotive, LLC and Rivian Automotive, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-06694-MTM, in the District of Arizona on September 18, 2026. The docket assigns the case to Magistrate Judge Michael T. Morrissey with a magistrate election form (Dkt. 3), so the assignment holds only if both sides consent under 28 U.S.C. 636(c). Honeywell demands a jury and alleges willful infringement.

Patents and exemplary asserted claims

The complaint asserts seven patents and identifies exemplary claims in the counts:

  • U.S. Patent 7,088,264 - Flight safety system monitoring combinations of state values - exemplary claim 1 (complaint also discusses claim 24).
  • U.S. Patent 7,286,062 - Perspective view conformal traffic targets display - exemplary claim 1.
  • U.S. Patent 7,840,352 - Method and system for autonomous vehicle navigation - exemplary claim 1.
  • U.S. Patent 8,314,816 - System and method for displaying information on a display element - exemplary claim 14.
  • U.S. Patent 8,364,334 - System and method for navigating an autonomous vehicle using laser detection and ranging - exemplary claim 13.
  • U.S. Patent 9,355,567 - System and method for highlighting an area encompassing an aircraft that is free of hazards - exemplary claim 1.
  • U.S. Patent 10,133,856 - Method and system for managing software license for vehicle - exemplary claim 1.

Accused products

The counts accuse Rivian's Gen 1 vehicles (model years 2022-2024) and Gen 2 vehicles (model year 2025 and onward) operating one or more of Driver+, the Rivian Autonomy Platform, and Autonomy+. The complaint describes the R1T pickup, the R1S SUV, and the 2026 R2 midsize SUV, and says its claim charts map to the R1T and R1S. Driver+ is the assisted-driving suite on Gen 1. The Rivian Autonomy Platform is the hardware, camera, sensor, and software stack that comes standard on new vehicles, with complete Autonomy Platform hardware on every Gen 2 vehicle. Autonomy+ is an upgrade available on Rivian's latest vehicles, including a 60-day trial on new R1S and R1T deliveries.

What the patents cover

Honeywell's narrative is an aerospace-to-EV spin-off story: aircraft safety, traffic-display, and autonomy inventions being practiced in Rivian's road vehicles. The lead claim summaries below restate issued claim language; they are not findings that Rivian practices any claim.

U.S. Patent 7,088,264

U.S. Patent 7,088,264 covers determining unsafe vehicle conditions by watching combinations of state values, not just single sensors in isolation.

Claim 1 covers a method that monitors values of vehicle states, compares combinations of those values to known unsafe combinations, and identifies combinations that match the unsafe set.

U.S. Patent 7,840,352

U.S. Patent 7,840,352 covers autonomous navigation that fuses GPS, inertial, and image measurements to estimate vehicle position over time.

Claim 1 covers a navigation method that provides GPS, inertial, and image sensors on an autonomous vehicle, obtains measurements from each, integrates those measurements together, and estimates the vehicle's position over time from that integration.

U.S. Patent 10,133,856

U.S. Patent 10,133,856 covers managing a vehicle software-module license by tying access denial at expiration to the vehicle's observed operating state.

Claim 1 covers a method that receives license-term data including an expiration time limit, observes a vehicle condition with a sensor, determines an operating state from that condition, and decides whether to deny access to the software module at expiration based on that operating state.

The remaining asserted patents

U.S. Patent 7,286,062 covers a traffic-target display that sizes icons by sensed range within bounded maximum and minimum sizes. Exemplary asserted claim: 1.

U.S. Patent 8,314,816 covers a vehicle display system that renders range data and a time-correlated image of a detected object on a synthetic terrain view, then updates the image as a predicted view of the object at a later sampling time. Exemplary asserted claim: 14.

U.S. Patent 8,364,334 covers autonomous-vehicle navigation that processes range scans and navigation data through ground-plane, range-based, and intensity-based classification modules; fusing their outputs into range bin classifications is added by dependent claim 14. Exemplary asserted claim: 13.

U.S. Patent 9,355,567 covers a hazard display that draws a contracting object-free swath around the vehicle and shows an avoidance-maneuver icon. Exemplary asserted claim: 1.

What the lawsuit is about

Honeywell alleges Rivian has been on notice of these patents for years. Counsel for Honeywell sent a detailed written notice on April 20, 2023 that identified patents by number and title and enclosed claim charts, and asked for a substantive response by May 4, 2023. Rivian answered by email on June 2, 2023 that it was reviewing the letter and would respond, and, the complaint says, never did (paragraph 118). Honeywell sent a September 25, 2025 follow-up that enclosed the April 2023 letter, restated the infringement allegations, added a claim chart on the '567 patent, and asked Rivian to make contact within two weeks (paragraphs 119 and 120). The complaint says Rivian did not respond to the September 2025 letter and has never provided a substantive response (paragraphs 121 and 122). The prayer for relief asks for a willfulness judgment, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284, an exceptional-case finding and attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C. 285, and preliminary and permanent injunctions against further infringement of any patent-in-suit.

Two patents have expired

Google Patents lists U.S. Patent 7,088,264 as expired on May 27, 2023 and U.S. Patent 7,286,062 as expired on January 5, 2026. If those dates hold, the two counts can reach only damages for conduct before expiration, within the six-year limit in 35 U.S.C. 286, and the injunction request cannot apply to them. The complaint says Honeywell served its '264 claim chart on April 20, 2023, about five weeks before that listed expiration. The complaint does not mention either expiration.

Practice meaning

This Arizona filing is the Rivian half of a same-day, same-patent EV autonomy campaign. Honeywell also sued Lucid the same day in the Eastern District of Texas on the same seven patents (see the companion analysis Honeywell Aerospace v. Lucid on this site). For readers tracking ADAS and autonomy stacks, the two complaints map the same aerospace-origin claim set onto different OEM feature names - DreamDrive on Lucid, Driver+ / Autonomy Platform / Autonomy+ on Rivian - which will shape claim construction, notice proof, and any later coordination or consolidation arguments.

Practice pointers

  • Read the Arizona Rivian complaint next to the Eastern District of Texas Lucid complaint. Same seven patents and similar willfulness notice theory; different accused feature branding and venues.
  • Watch how Honeywell treats the two patents with listed expiration dates when it serves infringement contentions and when it presses for injunctive relief.
  • Track Gen 1 versus Gen 2 and Autonomy+ trial-versus-paid upgrade distinctions early; product discovery may split along those lines.

Why it matters

The suit puts aerospace-origin ADAS and autonomy patents against a volume EV maker's driver-assistance stack. The claim mix spans unsafe-state combination monitoring, range-scaled traffic icons, GPS/inertial/image fusion, sensor-fusion displays, laser classification, hazard swaths, and license-expiration tied to operating state - a broad map for claim construction and product discovery across Rivian's Gen 1 and Gen 2 lineup.

What to watch next

Watch Rivian's answer and any early Rule 12 or venue challenges in Arizona, claim-construction proposals on the seven patents, and whether Honeywell coordinates or distinguishes this case from the Lucid Eastern District of Texas companion.