Tuesday, November 25, 2014

More Filings and an Update

1387 19 Pages of Lawyers Emailing Each Other

1387 Designation of Evidence

1388 Plaintiff under Seal


PS  Document 1386, when one tries to bring it up, states:  "This document is not available."  This is normally what one sees on a sealed document.  It may be the item addressed in 1388?  Or something else?

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Ethanol Producer Magazine Article

Edward Carroll, CEO and chief financial officer of GreenShift, told Ethanol Producer Magazinethat while the case was being appealed, the company’s patents remained valid.  The next step for GreenShift is appeal. “We think the judge got it wrong,” he said, explaining that district court cases on patents that are appealed go to a specialized three-judge panel that only hear cases on patents. “It’s the only district court that specializes in patent law, only because it’s so complex,” he said. “In our case, we feel that the district judge did not understand the patent law, and hopefully on appeal the three-judge panel will see our view.”

See Here


Update tiny

GERS Motion


Friday, November 14, 2014

3Q is Out

On October 23, 2014 the District Court in Indiana ruled in favor of defendants on their motions for summary judgment alleging that the corn oil extraction patents that have been issued to GS CleanTech were invalid. The judge’s ruling in the MDL case is not final as there are additional issues in the case that are not resolved. The Company strongly disagrees with the Judge’s ruling, intends to mount a vigorous appeal and notes that all patents remain valid until the appeals process is exhausted.

On October 23, 2014 the United States District Court in Indiana, to which our patent enforcement actions had been assigned, entered summary judgment declaring that our principal corn oil extraction patents are invalid. The decision is not yet final, pending additional issues in the case.  We intend to appeal the decision at the appropriate time and believe that we will ultimately prevail. However, the decision may have an adverse impact on our licensing activities until we achieve a favorable result in the court of appeals.
See Here


The Big SJ

*Summary Judgement* 230+ pages

Skunk's SJ Highlights copy/pasted  2+ pages

Discharging Order to show cause

Defendant's Testimony


Thursday, November 13, 2014

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Tuesday, October 28, 2014


No good deed goes unpunished

30,000 Pages


GreenShift PR

 — GS CleanTech Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of GreenShift Corporation (OTCQB:GERS), today announced that on October 23, 2014 the District Court in Indiana ruled in favor of defendants on their motions for summary judgment against the corn oil extraction patents that have been issued to GS CleanTech. GreenShift strongly disagrees with the Judge’s ruling and intends to mount a vigorous appeal. It is important to note that all patents remain valid until the appeals process is exhausted. This may be an initial victory to our opponents, but as the inventors of the corn oil extraction process that has been adopted by the vast majority of ethanol plants, GreenShift expects to ultimately prevail.

Read more here: http://www.heraldonline.com/2014/10/27/6462185/greenshift-provides-patent-litigation.html?sp=/100/773/385/#storylink=cpy



Monday, October 27, 2014

ICM Press Release Pulled?

The link to the ICM Press Release now does not work.  I checked it myself this morning.

http://www.icminc.com/icm-media/whats-new-at-icm/23-press-releases/215-gs-cleantech-patents-held-not-infringed-and-invalid.html  here


PS  As of 13:36 CST the whole ICM website is down ; ; ; http://www.icminc.com/  Here

ICM Press Release

(Colwich, Kan. –October 24, 2014)– ICM, Inc. is pleased to announce that the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana issued a sealed order on October 23, 2014 holding all asserted GS CleanTech's corn oil separation patents (U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,601,858; 8,008,516; 8,008,517; 8,234,484; and 8,168,037) invalid and not infringed.
"The District Court’s Order resolves all pending motions for summary judgment in the Multi-District Litigation." said Brian Burris, Vice-President and General Counsel of ICM, Inc. "This is a paramount ruling in the patent litigation and will be beneficial for the entire ethanol industry that ICM continues to support."
The District Court has ordered the parties to show cause by November 6, 2014 as to why the Court should not unseal the entirety of the document for public access.

Deborah Bolen, ICM, Inc.
316-977-6882 Office.
Please note that the ICM press release above specifically claims inclusion of the '484 patent while another defendant's filing makes this statement:  "The court exempts the 484 Patent from this ruling . . . "


Summary Judgment?

See Here

Above the Judge, in reference to 1351 writes:   "Order on Cross Motions for Summary Judgment, Master Docket No. 1351"

See Here

In the above link the defendants refer to the same document in this manner: 

"In Docket No. 1351, the Court grants summary judgment at page 174 of the Order, stating that the ‘858, ‘516, and ‘517 Patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. §102(b)’s on sale bar for the reasons stated in the Order."

When I look at 1351 all I can see is a statement that says it is sealed.  So for now all I can do is show how it is referred to in these other documents.

Free Blog CounterTamron