Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Saturday, August 30, 2014

Status Conference

September 18, 2014
See Here


Tuesday, August 26, 2014

GERS Response

CleanTech is simply arguing that it is much more judicially efficient to add the ‘037 patent and ICM due to the Court’s history and experience with technical and legal issues involving the ‘037 patent. If the claims are not added to these lawsuits, they will only be refiled in new lawsuits that are likely to be joined with this MDL.

See Here


Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Production Ruling

Based on its review and representations made in the cover letters, the court determines that substantially all of the documents may be withheld from production because they are attorney-client privileged communications or because they do not fall within the scope of documents to be produced under the court’s June 30 Supplemental Order.

See Here


Sunday, August 17, 2014

Request to Deny GERs' Motion

A decision on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of invalidity of the ‘037 patent is pending before the Court. There is no cause for adding a patent that the Court will soon declare invalid.
See Here

Seal it for now  1

Seal it for now  2

Seal it for now  3

PS  Is it just me - or is it "brash" to tell the court what the court is about to do?

Thursday, August 14, 2014


This amendment is being filed in order to correct an error in Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

See Here page 20:

2Q Was:

The Company is party to employment agreements with Kevin Kreisler, formerly the Company’s Chairman, . .

2Q/A Now:

The Company is party to employment agreements with Kevin Kreisler, the Company’s Chairman who was formerly its Chief Executive Officer, . .


PS Might be more corrections, but I noticed this one.


Gross profit for the three months ended June 30, 2014 was about $2.5 million as compared to about $2.3 million from the second quarter of 2013.

Net income for three months ended June 30, 2014 was about $2.8 million (Net Income = Bottom Line) as compared to net loss of about $0.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2013.

Net income (loss) per share – basic last three months $0.06  last six months $0.12


Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Law to Add ICM

Similarly, the determination of WNYE’s direct infringement is a necessary predicate to finding ICM liable for indirect infringement. ICM is already a party in this MDL and is indemnifying a number of the ethanol plants named as WNYE in this MDL. Accordingly, ICM will not be prejudiced by being added to the Complaint against WNYE because it is already heavily involved in a number of the associated cases in this matter and shares the same litigation counsel representing WNYE.

CleanTech respectfully requests that the Court allow the proposed amendment because there is no reason to deny the requested amendment.

See Here

40. Defendants infringe and will continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the ‘516 patent, by, among other activities, practicing the claimed methods and/or processes, and/or by knowingly and actively inducing others to infringe, and/or by contributing to the infringement of others.
41. Defendants’ infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducement to infringe has injured GS CleanTech, and GS CleanTech is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it for such infringement.
42. Defendants’ infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducement to infringe has been willful, deliberate, and objectively reckless.
43. Defendants’ infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure GS CleanTech, unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of products or practice of any methods and/or processes that come within the scope of the claims of the ‘516 patent.

Exhibit A HERE


Sunday, August 10, 2014

Lets Not Leave out ICM

Through recent depositions, CleanTech has confirmed that ICM was pivotal to the implementation of WNYE’s accused oil separation system. More particularly, ICM installed and optimized the accused system and provided training and documents on the operation of the system (id. at 54:14-57:10). Further, ICM has indemnified WNYE against the infringement claims of the patents-in-suit. (Deposition of WNYE Controller Timothy Winters 14:4-16:6).3

Because a claim for indirect infringement requires an act of direct infringement, Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Tech., Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2111, 2117 (2014), it is practical and efficient to decide ICM’s liability at the same time as WNYE’s.

See Here


Saturday, August 2, 2014

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Litigation Update

Add '037 Western New York

Add '037 Little Sioux

Add '037 Southwest Iowa

AI answer to 1st Amended Complaint

AI answer filed with Patent Office


Thursday, July 24, 2014

Orders 2-1

Order on Motion to Compel by ‘037 Defendants (Master Dkt. 975) 

These matters are before the court on a motion by defendants that have been accused of infringing the ‘037 patent to compel attorney Peter Hagerty to answer certain questions relating to the prosecution of the ‘037 patent before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.1 Mr. Hagerty refused to answer generally on work product grounds. For the reasons discussed below, the court DENIES the defendants’ motion.

For the foregoing reasons, the ‘037 Defendants’ Motion to Compel (Master Dkt. 975) is DENIED.

See Here
The recent Supreme Court decision in Daimler AG reaffirmed that simply "doing business" in a state is not enough to confer general jurisdiction over a party.

See Here

 GRANTS GS CleanTech’s motion. The Scheduling Order for the Old Tag-Along (MDN 1131) is hereby amended as follows:

See Here


Friday, July 18, 2014

Pure Bluster

Finally, Guardian’s argument that the ‘037 patent is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)(Opposition, p. 5) is pure bluster and should not be considered by the Court as a basis for denying the motion to amend. CleanTech has addressed this issue in detail in MDL # MDN 1160. Under the correct application of § 102(e), the relevant portion of the ‘858 patent specification does not qualify as § 102(e) prior art against the ‘037 patent. The PTO has already come to the same conclusion during the prosecution of an application related to the ‘037 patent.
Therefore, the ‘037 patent cannot be invalidated under § 102(e) in view of the ‘858 patent.



Reason for GERS Sealed

Sunday, July 13, 2014


Lignin Recovery

Lignin is an integral part of all lignocellulosic material. It serves as a structural component and plays a significant roll in the transfer of water in plants. Lignin is a biopolymer containing aromatic phenoxy-groups, aliphatic carboxy-groups and aliphatic alcohols, and if recovered and purified, lignin can be adapted to many functional chemistries.
Today, a significant amount of lignin can be found within a byproduct stream of pulp and paper mills known as black liquor. Black Liquor is a byproduct of the pulp and paper process that is generally concentrated in multi-effect evaporation and then burned for energy. GreenShift estimates that more than 50 million tons of lignin is burned each year at pulp and paper mills worldwide.
Furthermore, should the United States reach its lignocellulosic ethanol goal of 16 billion gallons per year, this industry would product a byproduct stream containing more than 100 million tons per year of lignin that most expect will also be burned for energy production.
GreenShift believes that if efficiently recovered and purified, lignin’s value would far exceed that of boiler fuels. As such, GreenShift has invested in and continues to invest in the development of cost effective extraction and purification process technologies that can be adopted by pulp and paper manufacturing facilities as well as lignocellulosic ethanol facilities.
Furthermore, GreenShift is investing in and developing high value applications for lignin. Many of the products being developed by GreenShift from lignin are direct replacements for petroleum derived products; thereby further reducing global dependence on oil, creating significant sources of income and improving the environment.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Short Order

For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS in PART and DENIES in PART
CleanTech’s motion to quash the subpoena (Dkt. 5) to Michael Rye. Mr. Rye’s
deposition may not be taken by the defendants unless, after they depose Mr.
O’Brien, a strong showing of the need for Mr. Rye’s testimony is demonstrated as
addressed above.

See Here

Free Blog CounterTamron