A lead would need to teach significantly more to even be considered.
Does the vehicle have (1) an after-market device installed that (2) detects that a first component stopped sending commands to a second component and (3) uses relay switch to disconnect the failed first component from the second component and (4) starts sending commands to the second component on its own that are indistinguishable from those sent by the first component?
Technically, the above requirements are needed against claim 20 of '707. Claim 6 requires fewer features.
That doesn't help us because:
(1) claim 20 is asserted in the complaint [0], and
(2) claim 20 was upheld in a previous challenge to its validity (an "IPR"), so it's got some staying power.
Does the vehicle have (1) an after-market device installed that (2) detects that a first component stopped sending commands to a second component and (3) uses relay switch to disconnect the failed first component from the second component and (4) starts sending commands to the second component on its own that are indistinguishable from those sent by the first component?
Technically, the above requirements are needed against claim 20 of '707. Claim 6 requires fewer features. That doesn't help us because: (1) claim 20 is asserted in the complaint [0], and (2) claim 20 was upheld in a previous challenge to its validity (an "IPR"), so it's got some staying power.
[0] https://blog.comma.ai/img/20220824085232055.pdf