Thursday, August 27, 2015


Defendants Motion

To Compel

Objection Occurs

Dorisio Deponent

Hagerty Disposition


ps.  With the quarterly well past the 5 day extension we are in new territory.  Needless to say the news has not been encouraging on any front and failure to report timely with the SEC is no exception.

Saturday, August 15, 2015

Late 2Q

See Here


Monday, June 29, 2015

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Friday, May 15, 2015


I expect the 1Q today, near the end of the business day.
Just my best guess.  Last year it was May 16th, Previous two years it was the 15th.  If not, we will see the automatic extension request in its place. You will see it here first.


Thursday, May 7, 2015


On May 1, 2015 Viridis Capital, LLC, by agreement with the GreenShift Board of Directors, exchanged one billion (1,000,000,000) restricted shares of GreenShift common stock for 7,161 shares of Series D Preferred Stock. Kevin Kreisler, the sole director and CEO of GreenShift Corporation, is the managing member of Viridis Capital, LLC.  Viridis Capital, LLC acquired the one billion shares in December 2014 by converting 7,161 shares of Series D Preferred Stock.
Upon cancellation of the one billion common shares, there were 1,465,230,570 shares of common stock outstanding.


Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Defendants make Accusations

1. The financial arrangement between Plaintiff and counsel, including the motivations behind counsel’s preparation and filing of a false affidavit with the Patent Office;

2. Plaintiff’s grant of hundreds of millions of shares to the named inventors of the patents-in-suit;

3. Plaintiff’s abrupt removal of the named inventors of the patents-in-suit (as well as Mr. Barlage, who Plaintiff should have named as an inventor (another act of inequitable conduct before the Patent Office)), from its board of directors shortly after the Court’s finding that the patents-in-suit are invalid;

4. How Plaintiff has used the patents-in-suit to extort the ethanol industry;

5. Plaintiff’s removal of money from the company in the shadow of this Court’s invalidity findings;

6. Why Plaintiff’s primary creditor agreed not to forbear in exchange for removal of people from its board of directors; and

7. Whether Plaintiff is depleting the company so that it won’t have any assets left to satisfy an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to Defendants.

See Here 1460


Thursday, April 23, 2015


See Here


PS   Rule 13d-1(c) is checked in the filing:

Rule 13d-1(c) is the “Passive Investor” exemption and provides that holders who (1) have not acquired the securities with any purpose, or with the effect, of changing or influencing the control of the issuer (or in connection with or as a participant in any transaction having that purpose or effect), (2) are not an “Institutional Investor” defined in the “Institutional Investor” exemption and (3) are not directly or indirectly the beneficial owner of 20 percent or more of the class may file a Schedule 13G in lieu of a Schedule 13D. The determination of whether an investor is a “passive investor” is based on the specific facts and circumstances of the investment.  source

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

Could this be Big News?!?

Is this the end of our journey? Or another door?
Settlement Conference end of next month . . .
See Here

Order on motion for clarification 1458

GERS says do not reconsider Discovery


Saturday, April 11, 2015


Defendants ask for Clarification 1455
See Here


Wednesday, April 8, 2015


As of April 7, 2015, there were 1,874,638,210­­­­­­­ shares of common stock outstanding.

In October 2014, the District Court in Indiana ruled in favor of the defendants in our pending patent infringement matter on their motions for summary judgment alleging that our corn oil extraction patents were invalid, including US Pat. Nos. 7,601,858 and 8,168,037. In December 2014, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office allowed three new corn oil extraction patent applications (U.S. Patent Application Nos.: 11/908,891, 13/185,841 and 13/450,997). Each application was examined and considered patentable by a different patent examiner, after each had considered the summary judgment decision. We cannot speak to the significance of the conflicting determinations.


GreenShift Corporation currently has 10 full-time employees. In addition to its executive officers, GreenShift employs sales personnel, staff engineers, process managers, maintenance managers, administrative personnel and general facility technicians. There is no union representation for any of our employees.

See Here



1454 Trial Dates




Friday, April 3, 2015

10-K Notice

Our Annual Report on Form 10-K could not be filed within the required time because there was a delay in completing the procedures necessary to close the books for the year.

See Here


Sunday, March 29, 2015


Court hereby GRANTS Partial Summary Judgment in favor of Defendants ICM, Inc., David Vander Griend, and Flottweg Separation Technology, Inc.,

 Court hereby DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE ICM, Inc.’s, claim under the Lanham Act, Count I of the Fifth Amended Complaint. This Order does not waive Plaintiff GS CleanTech’s right to appeal either Order.

See Here 1448
1451+1452 sealed


Friday, March 20, 2015


This is not Greenshift - but an old one with some familiar names. Looks like a final settlement in about a month. . .

See Here

Free Blog CounterTamron