Automotive Technology

Subscribe to Automotive Technology via RSS

As advanced mobility technologies continue to evolve, from advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and autonomous vehicles (AVs) to electric vehicles (EVs), companies are facing a rapidly changing legal and regulatory landscape. Increased litigation activity, shifting government oversight, and growing scrutiny around safety, validation, and consumer expectations are reshaping the industry and creating new challenges for manufacturers, suppliers, technology developers, and mobility stakeholders.

Continue Reading Dykema Drives Auto Webinar | Advanced Mobility: Shifting Risks, Evolving Rules

What does the future of mobility look like, and how are automakers planning to get there? In this 11-minute interview, Tom Moga, attorney and Member of Dykema, joins Ron Hesse to explore key questions facing automakers:

Continue Reading “The Next Auto Power Shift: Executive Decisions on China, Critical Minerals, and Electrification Strategy”

Trending Up: No Hands, No Excuses

With the release of NHTSA’s new Automated Vehicle Framework (AVF) in April, manufacturers of autonomous systems can see a more straightforward—if more arduous—path forward. The Framework aims to harmonize federal standards, streamline crash reporting, and formally extend the Automated Vehicle Exemption Program to U.S.-produced vehicles.

As more vehicles move into SAE Levels 3–5, liability and consumer attitudes in product liability continue to evolve. When something goes wrong, both plaintiffs and regulators are more likely to scrutinize the underlying technology and the entities responsible for designing, testing, and maintaining it. That means more litigation grounded in product liability and software defect claims, and more pressure on OEMs and suppliers to comply from the outset.

Trending Down: The Privacy Hurdle

Continue Reading Trending Up/Trending Down: Advanced Mobility

Tap into the Pulse of the Industry!

In less than four weeks, join in-house counsel and business leaders for a day of legal insight, peer networking, and high-speed thrills.

Preview the Agenda at a Glance and watch the video to see what’s ahead.

Register Today!
*This event is limited to in-house legal professionals and…

Dykema’s Automotive Industry Group, a four-time recipient of Law360’s Practice Group of the Year for Transportation, is pleased to announce the release of its 3rd Annual Automotive Trends Report. This comprehensive analysis offers critical legal insights into the dynamic challenges and opportunities shaping the automotive industry in 2025.

Based on a survey of Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), suppliers, and industry decision-makers, this year’s report delves into:

Continue Reading Dykema Releases 2025 Automotive Trends Report: Navigating Industry Transformation Amidst Regulatory Shifts, Tech Advances, and Supply Chain Strain

On Wednesday, May 31, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a new proposal that could “maximize the lifesaving potential” of Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) systems. Clay Cossé of Dykema’s Automotive Industry Group breaks down the key highlights.

Continue Reading 5 Takeaways From the New Proposal That Could Put Emergency Braking in Every Car

On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed into law the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (“Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” or “IIJA”). Vehicle, highway, and crash safety improvements were not a major part of the IIJA’s billing. Maybe the lack of publicity on this aspect of the IIJA was the result of the legislation’s overall vast scope. Whatever the reason, the IIJA actually affected (or at least required NHTSA to effect) a number of substantial and consequential vehicle safety initiatives.

It’s now just more than a year after the IIJA’s enactment, so I wanted to discuss the IIJA in the vehicle safety context in a two-part series. In the first part of this series, I discussed what the IIJA is—what did it do/require NHTSA to do? In the second part of this series, I’ll discuss what NHTSA has done to affect the IIJA mandates in the roughly 14 months since it was enacted.

Continue Reading Update on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Where Are We a Year Later? [Part II]

On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed into law the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (“Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” or “IIJA”). Vehicle, highway, and crash safety improvements were not a major part of the IIJA’s billing. Maybe the lack of publicity on this aspect of the IIJA was the result of the legislation’s overall vast scope. Whatever the reason, the IIJA actually affected (or at least required NHTSA to effect) a number of substantial and consequential vehicle safety initiatives. 

It’s now just over a year after the IIJA’s enactment, so I wanted to take this opportunity to discuss the IIJA in the vehicle safety context in a two-part series. I’ll first discuss what the IIJA is—what did it do/require NHTSA to do? In the second part of this series, I’ll discuss what NHTSA has done to affect the IIJA’s mandates in the roughly 14 months since it was enacted.

Continue Reading Update on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Where Are We a Year Later? [Part I]

Part Two of Two – Intelligent Speed Assistance

Last week, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended that all new vehicles be equipped with (a) passive blood-alcohol monitoring and (b) intelligent speed adaptation advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). The NTSB issued these two recommendations after investigating a horrific New Year’s Day 2021 crash that killed nine people in Avenal, California. That crash occurred when an intoxicated driver crossed the centerline of a two-lane highway. At the time, he was traveling 88-98 mph—33-43 mph above the posted 55-mph speed limit. He struck a pickup head-on, tragically killing himself and a family of eight. The NTSB’s recommendations address two problematic aspects of this driver’s conduct that account for significant societal harm in the U.S.: impaired driving and speeding.

Is this anything new? And does it signify a potential move towards strict products liability by auto manufacturers for driver fault via illegal activity? This two-part post will address those questions. In short, the answers are (a) kind of, but not really, and (b) not quite—these technologies are nascent, not state of the art.
Continue Reading Products Liability and Regulatory Implications of the NTSB’s Recent Recommendations on Blood Alcohol Monitoring and Intelligent Speed Assistance [Part II]

Part One of Two – Passive Blood-Alcohol Monitoring

Last week, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended that all new vehicles be equipped with (a) passive blood-alcohol monitoring and (b) intelligent speed adaptation advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). The NTSB issued these two recommendations after investigating a horrific New Year’s Day 2021 crash that killed nine people in Avenal, California. That crash occurred when an intoxicated driver crossed the centerline of a two-lane highway. At the time, he was traveling 88-98 mph—33-43 mph above the posted 55-mph speed limit. He struck a pickup head-on, tragically killing himself and a family of eight. The NTSB’s recommendations address two problematic aspects of this driver’s conduct that account for significant societal harm in the U.S.: impaired driving and speeding.

Is this anything new? And does it signify a potential move towards strict products liability by auto manufacturers for driver fault via illegal activity? This two-part post will address those questions. In short, the answers are (a) kind of, but not really, and (b) not quite—these technologies are nascent, not state of the art.
Continue Reading Products Liability and Regulatory Implications of the NTSB’s Recent Recommendations on Blood Alcohol Monitoring and Intelligent Speed Assistance [Part I]