We are not sure yet . . .

Lincolway's 10Q is out and here are two interesting items:

"Lincolnway Energy is unable to determine at this time if the Complaint will have a material adverse affect on Lincolnway Energy."p32

"For the six months ended March 31, 2010 there were reported sales for excess syrup and corn oil of $708,537. . ." p21
SEE IT HERE
***************************** 
At 20% royalties this would be $141,707.40.  At treble rates that is $425,122.20.  Of course that is a small period of the time they have been running since the patents were published in 2006.  Its my best guess, royalties are accuring. . .
*****************************
Royalties Are Accruing

GreenShift has a statutory right to reasonable royalties for every pound of corn oil extracted with GreenShift’s technologies beginning as early as February 23, 2006, the publication date of GreenShift’s first patent.

ICM’s Claims Were Rejected

Cardinal and ICM appear to rely solely on the hope that the court will invalidate GreenShift’s patents based entirely on information considered and rejected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “PTO”) prior to the issuance of GreenShift’s patents. GreenShift believes that this argument is especially weak and that it must fail. Cardinal and ICM argue that GreenShift’s inventions were obvious and unpatentable. That is simply not the case. ICM previously raised the information that it believed invalidated GreenShift’s invention and failed – the PTO considered and rejected the materials raised by ICM prior to the issuance of GreenShift’s first two patents in October 2009. Any producer that relies upon ICM’s continued claims of invalidity does so at its own peril.
*************************


SkunK