68 Chevrolet Caprice 2 Dr Unmolested Original Driver on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy Bolt name just might get through US trademark office

UPDATE: GM told AutoblogGreen on June 1 that, "Our Chevrolet Legal team has been working closely with the USPT on the Chevrolet Bolt trademark. As of last week, our legal staff received consent from Yamaha to use the Bolt name. According to our legal team, our USPT application is back to active status." Also, it appears that GM has further trademarked Bolt EV and Chevrolet Bolt EV. Chevy wants to sell a 200-mile electric vehicle for around $35,000 in a few years. The Detroit automaker wants to call that car the Bolt, not to be confused with the company's other plug-in, the Chevy Volt. Unless something changes, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is going to crush GM's Bolt-flavored dreams. The USPTO has suspended GM's trademark application. The USPTO said in its suspension that there was a "likelihood of confusion" with another Bolt trademark, No. 4429759, which applies to a Bolt trademark filed by Yamaha on August 09, 2012. That's well before GM's effort to trademark the Bolt name in 2014. GM's application will remain suspended, the USPTO said, "until the earlier-filed referenced application(s) is either registered or abandoned." Maybe GM will use this setback to respond to the many criticisms of the Bolt name we've heard since it was first announced. There is another page on the USPTO's website that says GM's Bolt application is still live, but we assume that just hasn't been updated yet. Related Video:

Chevy Spark EV could be coming to Midwest later this year

Ohio is not known as a hotbed of EV sales – if anything, the state is a bit anti-EV, thanks to a legislative fight against Tesla's direct sales model – but it might be on Chevrolet's short list to expand the market for the Spark EV in the near future. The latest official GM press release on the battery-powered Spark still says the car is "available exclusively in California and Oregon," but Hybrid Cars found four Ohio dealerships that list a Spark EV on their websites, with hints the the car will be coming to the Midwest state by the end of the summer. See, for example, here, here, here and here. But that's probably not going to happen, according to Randy Fox, GM communication's manager for passenger cars. Fox told AutoblogGreen that, "At this point in time, we don't have any official plans to expand the Spark EV beyond California and Oregon." The reason is that California and Oregon have the infrastructure to support EVs, Fox said, and GM wants to be able to support its EV customers. "We are continuing to look at other options," he said. "The selling point for electric cars today is not advertising, it's eyeballs, it's peer exposure" – John O'Dell John O'Dell, a senior editor at Edmunds.com, told AutoblogGreen that, "It makes sense for [GM] to expand sales and it makes sense to do it in a quiet manner, to get these vehicles on the road. The selling point for electric cars today is not advertising, it's eyeballs, it's peer exposure. If someone in my neighborhood has one and he likes it, then maybe I can trust him. So it's important to get these vehicles on the road." Chevy sold 182 Spark EVs last month, a significant increase over the 98 sold in April. That's still small potatoes compared to the 3,000+ Nissan Leaf EVs sold last month, but making the electric Spark available in Ohio, say, or GM's home state of Michigan could boost those numbers. AutoblogGreen called a few dealerships in Michigan to see what they had heard. One salesman said he didn't think GM had started production yet but the inventory manager for another dealership said the Spark EV is scheduled to arrive in the Midwest in "roughly the fourth quarter." What would GM's incentive be to offer the car in markets outside of California where it can gain ZEV credits with each sale?

GM won't pay owners of recalled cars for lost value

Kenneth Feinberg, the man in charge of the General Motors compensation fund dealing with the its widespread ignition switch woes, has issued an informal, two-letter response to the plaintiffs in more than 70 lawsuits seeking redress for lost resale value of their Cobalts: "No." The cases were recently combined into one, but Feinberg told The Detroit News that the fund will deal "only with death and physical injury claims," and that "perceived diminished value" will get no consideration.
ALG, the firm specializing in establishing residual values, determined that Cobalt owners had lost $300 compared to the segment competition and doesn't envision any long-term effects from the recall situation. Feinberg's statement comes in advance of public details on how the compensation fund will work and adheres to GM's long-held position on the matter. The company has already asked a judge to throw out such suits using the pre-bankruptcy defense, even as it stopped using that defense in cases of injury and death.
With plenty of potential gain from the GM suit, however, don't expect the plaintiffs to give up yet. When Toyota was sued for the same reason during the unintended acceleration debacle, it eventually settled the case for between $1 billion and $1.4 billion just to get it over with. Since the 85 law firms involved in the Toyota litigation took home more than $250 million of that total, we shouldn't expect the attorneys to give up on a GM payout, either.