"He said the company would focus in particular on the deployment of corn oil extraction technology, which would provide attractive returns for shareholders."
SEE HERE IN IRISH TIMES
GPRE is a part of NTR, a larger company in Ireland and the UK. If you go to the NTR website you can find a link going back to their biofuels division = GPRE
Looks Like GreenShift might have opened a larger door than was first thought. . . Could this be important and lead somewhere?? Or is it just an interesting side bar???
SkunK
Friday, July 30, 2010
Thursday, July 29, 2010
GPRE Conference Call
UPDATE
******************
At 29:45 into the conference call (for a minute) we get a more detailed schedule for the COES build out:
Building crews are preparing/getting ready to start.
First COES (plant) up in 90 days/start of 4Q.
2nd, 3rd COES (plants) up shortly after start of 4Q
and 4th COES (plants) done in/by end of the 4Q 2010.
5th and 6th Coes (plants) done in 1Q 2011.
Slight/minimal corn oil production in 4Q.
Better corn oil contribution in 1Q 2011.
Nameplate at 480mmgy ethanol. They are running at about 520mmgy. (about 40mmgy over nameplate). They are optimistic they can buy another plant in 2010. Talking to a lot of people. Not actively looking for a Delta-T system. Looking for an ICM built Ethanol plant.
******************
The SkunK just got off the GPRE conference call - although he was just able to only listen to the last 20 minutes or so of the Q&A. (Whole call now on the GPRE site.)
One of the Q&A the SkunK heard?
Q -So what do you do with the corn oil. Its not food grade - What are the markets?
Todd Becker answered in three parts.
1. The first (highest profit) buyer is the high value industrial market. There they are looking for a "sustainable supply" for use in industrial plastics and the like.
2. The second option is the (animal) "feeder". The "feeder" likes the product and can use the corn oil to create profit in the feeder industry.
3. The third (lowest margin) market is Biodiesel. With the high cost of soy - (he noted the animal fats market has dropped lately) the biodiesel plants can pay 23 - 24 cents a pound for corn oil and still profit.
Mr. Becker then went on to state that the revenue figures released on the corn oil were based on a slight reduction of DDGS - which sell for about 5 cents a pound, to the added value creation of corn oil which sells for 20 - 25 cents/pound.
I didn't have a recorder on, but that's the way I remember it. Will be interested in listening to the entire call on the GPRE Website.
SkunK
******************
At 29:45 into the conference call (for a minute) we get a more detailed schedule for the COES build out:
Building crews are preparing/getting ready to start.
First COES (plant) up in 90 days/start of 4Q.
2nd, 3rd COES (plants) up shortly after start of 4Q
and 4th COES (plants) done in/by end of the 4Q 2010.
5th and 6th Coes (plants) done in 1Q 2011.
Slight/minimal corn oil production in 4Q.
Better corn oil contribution in 1Q 2011.
Nameplate at 480mmgy ethanol. They are running at about 520mmgy. (about 40mmgy over nameplate). They are optimistic they can buy another plant in 2010. Talking to a lot of people. Not actively looking for a Delta-T system. Looking for an ICM built Ethanol plant.
******************
The SkunK just got off the GPRE conference call - although he was just able to only listen to the last 20 minutes or so of the Q&A. (Whole call now on the GPRE site.)
One of the Q&A the SkunK heard?
Q -So what do you do with the corn oil. Its not food grade - What are the markets?
Todd Becker answered in three parts.
1. The first (highest profit) buyer is the high value industrial market. There they are looking for a "sustainable supply" for use in industrial plastics and the like.
2. The second option is the (animal) "feeder". The "feeder" likes the product and can use the corn oil to create profit in the feeder industry.
3. The third (lowest margin) market is Biodiesel. With the high cost of soy - (he noted the animal fats market has dropped lately) the biodiesel plants can pay 23 - 24 cents a pound for corn oil and still profit.
Mr. Becker then went on to state that the revenue figures released on the corn oil were based on a slight reduction of DDGS - which sell for about 5 cents a pound, to the added value creation of corn oil which sells for 20 - 25 cents/pound.
I didn't have a recorder on, but that's the way I remember it. Will be interested in listening to the entire call on the GPRE Website.
SkunK
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
GPRE Reports 2Q
Featured Highlights of the GreenShift/GPRE Deal
"In particular, we believe our deployment of corn oil extraction technology at all of our plants will provide attractive returns for our shareholders."
On July 21, 2010, Green Plains announced plans to implement corn oil extraction technology at its ethanol plants. The Company expects to complete the technology deployment by the end of the first quarter of 2011 at a cost of approximately $18 million and anticipates the project would enhance operating income by $15 million to $19 million per year. The Company anticipates first revenues from corn oil extraction at the Obion, Tennessee plant to occur within the next 90 days.
See Here
SkunK
"In particular, we believe our deployment of corn oil extraction technology at all of our plants will provide attractive returns for our shareholders."
On July 21, 2010, Green Plains announced plans to implement corn oil extraction technology at its ethanol plants. The Company expects to complete the technology deployment by the end of the first quarter of 2011 at a cost of approximately $18 million and anticipates the project would enhance operating income by $15 million to $19 million per year. The Company anticipates first revenues from corn oil extraction at the Obion, Tennessee plant to occur within the next 90 days.
See Here
SkunK
Whats Coming?
Here we are on HUMP day and things are as quiet as a church mouse. To the SkunK this means that any big news released by the company in conjunction with the reverse split will likely be done on MONDAY. Of course the split will become effective after trading hours on that day.
News that the SkunK thinks might be released includes this.:
1. GreenShift release on the GPRE deal.
2. Possible Issue of third COES patent.
3. GS Cleantech Corporation v. Adkins Energy LLC
4. Center Ethanol Company, LLC Agreement?
Also
With about 75% of the Billion gallon of ethanol production under new contract this year, and the drastic cuts we have seen in Interest Expense and Selling General and Administration costs - will the company announce we have the contracts in place to be/are profitable?
Will the company announce "Another Deal" to close (or push beyond?) that remaining 25% gap in contract goals?
None of this 1-4 information above has been acknowledged by GreenShift in a PR. Two - three above you likely only know about by reading this blog. So I expect them to put it out. I expect them to put it out in conjunction with the 10-1 Reverse Split effective Monday (after trading hours.) But we will see - should be very interesting over the next 5-10 trading days. I am long here, but for you traders - Happy Trading! Good Luck to Investors!.
SkunK
PS GreenShift is trading under GERS. After the R/S it will have a different trading symbol. Any predictions what it will be? GS$$? . . . And how about the picture of the SkunK? . . . Looks like I'm in a trance . . . and whats with the goober hat? lol
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
GPRE Corn Oil
GPRE has opened a new section on their web site - dedicated to corn oil.
SEE HERE
They promise updates on the Corn Oil Extraction progress here - so like the SkunK - you might want to bookmark this page and add to your list of things to watch.
SkunK
SEE HERE
They promise updates on the Corn Oil Extraction progress here - so like the SkunK - you might want to bookmark this page and add to your list of things to watch.
SkunK
Monday, July 26, 2010
Patented Technology worth 30 Cents earnings a (GPRE) Share?
An analyst at Piper Jaffery claims the COES deal with GreenShift is worth 30 cents earnings per GPRE share. Looks like GPRE made a sound business decision.
"Alright NO SHOVING! Lets everyone form a single line to sign a license agreement with GreenShift! No cutt'ng in or you'll get sent to the back of the line . . . Yes, litigants can get in the same line . . . Yes, ADM you can keep the GreenShift pen! Geeeze!" (SKUNK! STOP day dreaming and mow the Grass! ''yes dear.. ." lol)
*********************
Michael E. Cox, analyst at Piper Jaffray, has given an Overweight rating to Green Plains Renewable Energy (NASDAQ: GPRE), which constructs and operates dry mill, fuel-grade ethanol production facilities.
The positive outlook is mainly due to recent decision of the company to add a corn-oil extraction facility to its ethanol facilities. The payback period of this project would be 1.5 to 3 years and it would add $0.30 to the EPS.
*********************
SEE ALL HERE
SkunK
"Alright NO SHOVING! Lets everyone form a single line to sign a license agreement with GreenShift! No cutt'ng in or you'll get sent to the back of the line . . . Yes, litigants can get in the same line . . . Yes, ADM you can keep the GreenShift pen! Geeeze!" (SKUNK! STOP day dreaming and mow the Grass! ''yes dear.. ." lol)
*********************
Michael E. Cox, analyst at Piper Jaffray, has given an Overweight rating to Green Plains Renewable Energy (NASDAQ: GPRE), which constructs and operates dry mill, fuel-grade ethanol production facilities.
The positive outlook is mainly due to recent decision of the company to add a corn-oil extraction facility to its ethanol facilities. The payback period of this project would be 1.5 to 3 years and it would add $0.30 to the EPS.
*********************
SEE ALL HERE
SkunK
Sunday, July 25, 2010
A VEILED THREAT
Officers and Directors may be Liable Along with the Corporation for Patent Infringement
By William B. Bunker
It may come as quite a surprise to a corporate officer that he may be held liable, under certain circumstances, for the corporation's patent infringement, even in the absence of a piercing of the corporate veil. This is an especially serious risk in light of the provisions in the patent statute for up to treble damages, as well as lawyer fees. 35 U.S.C. §§284-85.
Perhaps the high-water mark of this type of personal liability was a 1986 decision in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In A. Stucki Co. v. Schwam, 634 F. Supp. 259 (E.D. Pa. 1986), the defendant was president and a director of a company that had originally been sued for patent infringement. The company was found to have infringed the patent, and a judgment was rendered against the company for money damages in the amount of more than $2.5 million. The patent holder was not able to satisfy the entire money judgment by executing on the corporate property, and subsequently successfully sued Schwam personally for patent infringement.
The district court explained: "Where the officer or director has directed or ordered the infringing method of manufacture or has controlled the sale of the infringing goods, he is jointly liable with the corporation for patent infringement without regard to his specific intent or knowledge."
As a result, Schwam, as CEO, was held personally liable for the monies that the corporation had not been able to pay. Moreover, the court refused to permit Schwam to personally relitigate the issues of patent infringement, patent validity, or even the amount of damages, stating that these issues had already been litigated in the prior lawsuit against his corporation.
SEE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE
SkunK
By William B. Bunker
It may come as quite a surprise to a corporate officer that he may be held liable, under certain circumstances, for the corporation's patent infringement, even in the absence of a piercing of the corporate veil. This is an especially serious risk in light of the provisions in the patent statute for up to treble damages, as well as lawyer fees. 35 U.S.C. §§284-85.
Perhaps the high-water mark of this type of personal liability was a 1986 decision in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In A. Stucki Co. v. Schwam, 634 F. Supp. 259 (E.D. Pa. 1986), the defendant was president and a director of a company that had originally been sued for patent infringement. The company was found to have infringed the patent, and a judgment was rendered against the company for money damages in the amount of more than $2.5 million. The patent holder was not able to satisfy the entire money judgment by executing on the corporate property, and subsequently successfully sued Schwam personally for patent infringement.
The district court explained: "Where the officer or director has directed or ordered the infringing method of manufacture or has controlled the sale of the infringing goods, he is jointly liable with the corporation for patent infringement without regard to his specific intent or knowledge."
As a result, Schwam, as CEO, was held personally liable for the monies that the corporation had not been able to pay. Moreover, the court refused to permit Schwam to personally relitigate the issues of patent infringement, patent validity, or even the amount of damages, stating that these issues had already been litigated in the prior lawsuit against his corporation.
SEE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE
SkunK
Ethanol Giants and PPS**
With the recent announced closing of the giant GreenShift deal with GPRE - the 4th largest Ethanol producer in North America, (which may add about $3-4M [$3.696M**] to the bottom line) the SkunK has started to look at the 3rd, 2nd and the largest producer and what THAT could mean to GreenShift's bottom line. Is the SkunK daydreaming again? Well, everyone is thinking about corn oil extraction and GreenShift has the patents . . . You decide.
*******************
POET, the largest ethanol producer in the world, is a leader in biorefining through its efficient, vertically integrated approach to production. The 22-year-old company produces more than 1.6 billion gallons of ethanol and 9 billion pounds of high-protein animal feed annually from 26 production facilities nationwide. POET also operates a pilot-scale cellulosic ethanol plant, which uses corn cobs as feedstock, and will commercialize the process in Emmetsburg, Iowa. For more information, visit http://www.poet.com.
June 30, 2010 Cloverdale plant UPDATE
The transaction closed June 29. Once open, the Cloverdale plant will be POET’s fourth in Indiana and 27th overall, putting annual ethanol production capacity at 1.7 billion gallons per year.
Poet, the world’s largest ethanol producer, has 27 plants and expects to ferment 3.5 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022. Its game plan is to get 1 billion from expanding production at its facilities, says Weishaar.
Another 1.4 billion will come from licensing technology to other grain ethanol companies and a final 1.1 billion will result from non-corn feedstock that Poet expects to process. Corporate headquarters is in Sioux Falls with corporate offices in Albert Lea, MN and Wichita, KS.
The Day GreenShift went to POET HQ
More information regarding GreenShift and its patented and patent-pending extraction technologies will be made available in Winsness’ presentation titled “Back End Fractionation” at the upcoming 2nd Annual Commercial Ethanol Technology and Research Workshop on October 28, 2009 at the Sioux Falls, South Dakota headquarters of POET.
SkunK estimate* on GERS bottom line by licensing Poet in 2010 with GreenShift COES:
(1.7B/100M)x2.2Mx1.75x.2) GreenShift Bottom line +$13Million
**************************
7/9/2010 UPDATE
Archer Daniels Midland Company (NYSE: ADM) today marked the opening of its new Columbus, Neb., ethanol dry mill, which provides the Company with an additional 300 million gallons of annual ethanol production capacity.
ADM’s total ethanol production capacity will reach 1.8 billion gallons per year once a second corn dry mill in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, opens later in 2010. Our global headquarters is in Decatur, Illinois, and our net sales for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, were $69 billion.
(1.8B/100M)x2.2Mx1.75x.2) ADM Deal to GreenShift bottom line - +$13.86 Million
**************************
Valero is also a leading ethanol producer with ten ethanol plants in the Midwest with a combined capacity of 1.1 billion gallons per year,
Valero Corporate Headquarters San Antonio, Texas
(1.1B/100M)x2.2Mx1.75x.2) Valero Deal to GreenShift Bottom line +$8.47Million
**************************
*ALL Estimates based on minimum 2.2mmgy of corn oil/100mmgy of ethanol production @ $1.75/gallon @ 20% standard licensing fee.
**Adding $3.696M to the GreenShift bottom line and figuring a maxed 20B OS, this GPRE deal theoretically adds .0001848 to the stocks earnings. If you figure this long range deal is worth a conservative ten time earnings, then this deal is worth a theoretical .001848 pps now (+18 times present pps) and .01848pps after the 2 August 10-1 Reverse Split.
**************************
SkunK
*******************
POET, the largest ethanol producer in the world, is a leader in biorefining through its efficient, vertically integrated approach to production. The 22-year-old company produces more than 1.6 billion gallons of ethanol and 9 billion pounds of high-protein animal feed annually from 26 production facilities nationwide. POET also operates a pilot-scale cellulosic ethanol plant, which uses corn cobs as feedstock, and will commercialize the process in Emmetsburg, Iowa. For more information, visit http://www.poet.com.
June 30, 2010 Cloverdale plant UPDATE
The transaction closed June 29. Once open, the Cloverdale plant will be POET’s fourth in Indiana and 27th overall, putting annual ethanol production capacity at 1.7 billion gallons per year.
Poet, the world’s largest ethanol producer, has 27 plants and expects to ferment 3.5 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022. Its game plan is to get 1 billion from expanding production at its facilities, says Weishaar.
Another 1.4 billion will come from licensing technology to other grain ethanol companies and a final 1.1 billion will result from non-corn feedstock that Poet expects to process. Corporate headquarters is in Sioux Falls with corporate offices in Albert Lea, MN and Wichita, KS.
The Day GreenShift went to POET HQ
More information regarding GreenShift and its patented and patent-pending extraction technologies will be made available in Winsness’ presentation titled “Back End Fractionation” at the upcoming 2nd Annual Commercial Ethanol Technology and Research Workshop on October 28, 2009 at the Sioux Falls, South Dakota headquarters of POET.
SkunK estimate* on GERS bottom line by licensing Poet in 2010 with GreenShift COES:
(1.7B/100M)x2.2Mx1.75x.2) GreenShift Bottom line +$13Million
**************************
7/9/2010 UPDATE
Archer Daniels Midland Company (NYSE: ADM) today marked the opening of its new Columbus, Neb., ethanol dry mill, which provides the Company with an additional 300 million gallons of annual ethanol production capacity.
ADM’s total ethanol production capacity will reach 1.8 billion gallons per year once a second corn dry mill in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, opens later in 2010. Our global headquarters is in Decatur, Illinois, and our net sales for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, were $69 billion.
(1.8B/100M)x2.2Mx1.75x.2) ADM Deal to GreenShift bottom line - +$13.86 Million
**************************
Valero is also a leading ethanol producer with ten ethanol plants in the Midwest with a combined capacity of 1.1 billion gallons per year,
Valero Corporate Headquarters San Antonio, Texas
(1.1B/100M)x2.2Mx1.75x.2) Valero Deal to GreenShift Bottom line +$8.47Million
**************************
*ALL Estimates based on minimum 2.2mmgy of corn oil/100mmgy of ethanol production @ $1.75/gallon @ 20% standard licensing fee.
**Adding $3.696M to the GreenShift bottom line and figuring a maxed 20B OS, this GPRE deal theoretically adds .0001848 to the stocks earnings. If you figure this long range deal is worth a conservative ten time earnings, then this deal is worth a theoretical .001848 pps now (+18 times present pps) and .01848pps after the 2 August 10-1 Reverse Split.
**************************
SkunK
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Remember the Judicial Panel on MDL?
JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
The next meeting will be July 29, 2010 - in Boise, Idaho. (click on Hearing Information tab). I expect to read the GreenShift case in the published schedule by the end of June.
Two weeks or so after that we know whats up and where the cases are headed for pretrial. Under current case law, centralization is available for pretrial purposes only. So if approved - the pretrial portion likely gets sent to a single location and all the motions are made and witnesses statements are taken. It then would be sent back to the original court for trial. I figure that by now in the scenario one might see where one is headed and that's why most of these patent cases are settled before it goes to a jury.
Well its tough sledding but I think this link shows the GreenShift case now ready to be assinged a judge and a location on the 29th of July. (Click on Docket Information and then Intellectual Property) We will find out within two weeks or so after that who and where. The information may very well be released in the 2Q - but I will try to get it first.
This is the best link - Here is schedule we are #2181 on page 9. We are designated for oral arguments.
Got Press credentials? Apply here to attend.
SkunK
If you got the patience to message a sloooow server you can eventually find this on the MDL site. ("Case management" - then "Query")You can see the unnannounced Adkins Energy case has been added on.
Friday, July 23, 2010
So What Does the SkunK ThinK?
The SkunK receives numerous E-Mails from readers giving him leads on stories and opinion. I received this email today and I find its arguments supported and self evident. The author must vacation in SkunK's head.
**************
GreenShift does not have an apparatus patent covering a centrifuge (disc-stack or horizontal) or any of the 100 other widgets used as part of a corn oil extraction system. GreenShift has METHOD patents which cover the process of extracting corn oil from the backend of ethanol plants. The novel METHODS described in GreenShift's patents were new to the ethanol industry in 2004 when GreenShift introduced them, and nobody, not Westfalia, nor ICM, nor any other widget supplier, nor any other widget assembler, extracted any corn oil before GreenShift using those methods. Any references to ICM "technology" here are false. ICM is a general contractor. Much like a contractor builds your house with 2 x 4s and pipe and wire and widgets, ICM builds process facilities using concrete, steel, pipe, wire and widgets. Other people's widgets. Sometimes, presumably to keep more margin for themselves, they copy widgets (hence, the well-known joke: "I Copy Machinery"). Stealing shamelessly from GreenShift's shareholders is just one example.
ICM's supporters argue that their Tricanter technology/widget allows them to circumvent GreenShift's novel method patents because a Tricanter is not a "disc stack" centrifuge/widget. ICM doesn't even own Tricanter "technology" - the mark "Tricanter" is the registered trademark of Flottweg
See their brochure: Http://www.flottweg.de/cms/upload/downloads/old/Solvent_Extraction_Crud_en.pdf
ICM buys Tricanter widgets from Flottweg and assembles them, with nuts, bolts, pipes, pumps and other widgets, into corn oil extraction systems based on the novel methods described in GreenShift's patents - methods, that ICM dissected in 2004/05 after purchasing two corn oil extraction systems (with 100s of individual widgets) from GreenShift under a non-disclosure agreement.
Not a lick of what ICM does with Flottweg's Tricanter improves upon what GreenShift disclosed in its patents in 2004. Those that comment that ICM has its own technology are unable to provide any foundation for their comments. If I am wrong then speak up. Their only defense is to call Flottweg's Tricanter widget an ICM "technology" and to play word games (such as, "buy my stuff and don't worry about GreenShift because they use a disc stack widget and ICM sells a shiny Tricanter widget"). ICM's own legal filings don't deny infringement but instead make the ridiculous argument that the U.S. Patent Office was somehow wrong. Right. They'll keep singing that song until the courts tell ICM to shut down and to cut GreenShift a 9 figure check.
Unfortunately, the stakes keep increasing and ICM is doing the ethanol industry and each of ICM's clients a huge injustice by inducing what very much looks like intentional infringement. ICM is walking ethanol producers straight into incredible liabilities which include treble damages and PERSONAL LIABILITY. The recent SIRE announcement is just the latest example. SIRE basically just broadcast what appears to be its intent to knowingly infringe despite having obviously received notice of GreenShift's patent rights. The law provides that "objectively reckless" and willful behavior subjects the infringer to liability for treble damages and attorneys fees. If that weren't enough: CORPORATE DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS CAN BE HELD TO BE PERSONALLY LIABLE FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT DAMAGES DUE TO THEIR ROLE IN APPROVING THE INFRINGEMENT. Look it up. I shit you not. What in the holy heck is SIRE's managers and board thinking? Might as well just give GreenShift the keys to their plant today and save a bunch of legal fees. Any plant that enters into an "indemnity" or "joint defense" agreement with ICM is basically just executing an affidavit admitting intentional infringement.
Some producers I know hate the fact that GreenShift delivered what is by far the single greatest innovation the ethanol industry has ever seen. They hate the fact that it is "simple" in hindsight and talk of ways to get around GreenShift's patents. They think they should have the right to take what they all know GreenShift invented. Some really smart people looked at GreenShift and its technologies and its patents. GreenShift raised $50 million to develop its technologies, plus another $38 million from General Electric to build extraction systems before GE ran out of money. Green Plains, Marquis, United, Global and Central and others all signed deals with GreenShift. You don't raise that kind of money or cut deals with those companies unless you are the real deal, and unless you add value.
Marquis was smart enough to ask the actual inventor of the patented METHODS how to improve yield with their off-the-shelf Tricanter widgets. GreenShift doubled their yield. Green Plains was smart enough to buy widgets and construction services from a general contractor and a technology license from the technology inventor, and they cut a deal that DOUBLES their entire 2009 net income. The writing is on the wall. GreenShift's patents are valid and strong. This deal is a glimpse of things to come.
*************
SkunK
**************
GreenShift does not have an apparatus patent covering a centrifuge (disc-stack or horizontal) or any of the 100 other widgets used as part of a corn oil extraction system. GreenShift has METHOD patents which cover the process of extracting corn oil from the backend of ethanol plants. The novel METHODS described in GreenShift's patents were new to the ethanol industry in 2004 when GreenShift introduced them, and nobody, not Westfalia, nor ICM, nor any other widget supplier, nor any other widget assembler, extracted any corn oil before GreenShift using those methods. Any references to ICM "technology" here are false. ICM is a general contractor. Much like a contractor builds your house with 2 x 4s and pipe and wire and widgets, ICM builds process facilities using concrete, steel, pipe, wire and widgets. Other people's widgets. Sometimes, presumably to keep more margin for themselves, they copy widgets (hence, the well-known joke: "I Copy Machinery"). Stealing shamelessly from GreenShift's shareholders is just one example.
ICM's supporters argue that their Tricanter technology/widget allows them to circumvent GreenShift's novel method patents because a Tricanter is not a "disc stack" centrifuge/widget. ICM doesn't even own Tricanter "technology" - the mark "Tricanter" is the registered trademark of Flottweg
See their brochure: Http://www.flottweg.de/cms/upload/downloads/old/Solvent_Extraction_Crud_en.pdf
ICM buys Tricanter widgets from Flottweg and assembles them, with nuts, bolts, pipes, pumps and other widgets, into corn oil extraction systems based on the novel methods described in GreenShift's patents - methods, that ICM dissected in 2004/05 after purchasing two corn oil extraction systems (with 100s of individual widgets) from GreenShift under a non-disclosure agreement.
Not a lick of what ICM does with Flottweg's Tricanter improves upon what GreenShift disclosed in its patents in 2004. Those that comment that ICM has its own technology are unable to provide any foundation for their comments. If I am wrong then speak up. Their only defense is to call Flottweg's Tricanter widget an ICM "technology" and to play word games (such as, "buy my stuff and don't worry about GreenShift because they use a disc stack widget and ICM sells a shiny Tricanter widget"). ICM's own legal filings don't deny infringement but instead make the ridiculous argument that the U.S. Patent Office was somehow wrong. Right. They'll keep singing that song until the courts tell ICM to shut down and to cut GreenShift a 9 figure check.
Unfortunately, the stakes keep increasing and ICM is doing the ethanol industry and each of ICM's clients a huge injustice by inducing what very much looks like intentional infringement. ICM is walking ethanol producers straight into incredible liabilities which include treble damages and PERSONAL LIABILITY. The recent SIRE announcement is just the latest example. SIRE basically just broadcast what appears to be its intent to knowingly infringe despite having obviously received notice of GreenShift's patent rights. The law provides that "objectively reckless" and willful behavior subjects the infringer to liability for treble damages and attorneys fees. If that weren't enough: CORPORATE DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS CAN BE HELD TO BE PERSONALLY LIABLE FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT DAMAGES DUE TO THEIR ROLE IN APPROVING THE INFRINGEMENT. Look it up. I shit you not. What in the holy heck is SIRE's managers and board thinking? Might as well just give GreenShift the keys to their plant today and save a bunch of legal fees. Any plant that enters into an "indemnity" or "joint defense" agreement with ICM is basically just executing an affidavit admitting intentional infringement.
Some producers I know hate the fact that GreenShift delivered what is by far the single greatest innovation the ethanol industry has ever seen. They hate the fact that it is "simple" in hindsight and talk of ways to get around GreenShift's patents. They think they should have the right to take what they all know GreenShift invented. Some really smart people looked at GreenShift and its technologies and its patents. GreenShift raised $50 million to develop its technologies, plus another $38 million from General Electric to build extraction systems before GE ran out of money. Green Plains, Marquis, United, Global and Central and others all signed deals with GreenShift. You don't raise that kind of money or cut deals with those companies unless you are the real deal, and unless you add value.
Marquis was smart enough to ask the actual inventor of the patented METHODS how to improve yield with their off-the-shelf Tricanter widgets. GreenShift doubled their yield. Green Plains was smart enough to buy widgets and construction services from a general contractor and a technology license from the technology inventor, and they cut a deal that DOUBLES their entire 2009 net income. The writing is on the wall. GreenShift's patents are valid and strong. This deal is a glimpse of things to come.
*************
SkunK
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Ethanol Producer Magazine
Check out this NEW article from Ethanol Producer magazine:
A few days after the algae project announcement, the company said it planned to install corn oil extraction technology at a total cost of $18 million. The corn oil extraction project is expected to be completed by the end of the first quarter of 2011. GPRE expects to enhance its operating income by $15 million to $19 million per year. "It’s a very nice value added revenue stream for us and for ethanol,” Stark said.
ICM Inc. will install the corn oil extraction technology at five of the company’s six plants, all originally built by that company. The sixth plant, located in Superior, Iowa, is a Delta-T plant and GPRE is currently working to get that under contract as well.
Due to an ongoing lawsuit between ICM and GS CleanTech Corp., a subsidiary of GreenShift Corp., GPRE has also entered into a license agreement with GS CleanTech to utilize its patents and pending patents, Stark said.
SEE HERE
Seems to suggest why ICM has the contract to install the COES for five of the six ethanol plants. Also why GPRE entered into the license agreement - "Due to an ongoing lawsuit . . ."
It also does not say that the patent agreement(s) are limited to the COES. GreenShift has at least 12 patents pending.
We will have to wait for GreenShift to explain - although everyone will surely take a stab at this. Its part of the fun. Will we get a GreenShift explanation after GPRE advises on its 2Q on the 29th? Will it be in conjunction with the 2 August R/S? or will it be in the next scheduled filing - our 2Q between 15-20 Aug?
My guess is there is a news gag agreement as part of the deal. GERS and ICM have to be quiet for a while so the focus is on GPRE. GPRE seems smart enough to insist - that since they are the customer - the PR will be about them. GPRE is paying the bills so they can make the rules. They are a public company and have a legitimate interest in getting their message out to their investors - Not have two litigants drown them out. So I expect after a reasonable time both GERS and ICM will present their sides in appropriate PRs.
SkunK's Take on this:
This is GREAT NEWS, details to follow!
SkunK
A few days after the algae project announcement, the company said it planned to install corn oil extraction technology at a total cost of $18 million. The corn oil extraction project is expected to be completed by the end of the first quarter of 2011. GPRE expects to enhance its operating income by $15 million to $19 million per year. "It’s a very nice value added revenue stream for us and for ethanol,” Stark said.
ICM Inc. will install the corn oil extraction technology at five of the company’s six plants, all originally built by that company. The sixth plant, located in Superior, Iowa, is a Delta-T plant and GPRE is currently working to get that under contract as well.
Due to an ongoing lawsuit between ICM and GS CleanTech Corp., a subsidiary of GreenShift Corp., GPRE has also entered into a license agreement with GS CleanTech to utilize its patents and pending patents, Stark said.
SEE HERE
Seems to suggest why ICM has the contract to install the COES for five of the six ethanol plants. Also why GPRE entered into the license agreement - "Due to an ongoing lawsuit . . ."
It also does not say that the patent agreement(s) are limited to the COES. GreenShift has at least 12 patents pending.
We will have to wait for GreenShift to explain - although everyone will surely take a stab at this. Its part of the fun. Will we get a GreenShift explanation after GPRE advises on its 2Q on the 29th? Will it be in conjunction with the 2 August R/S? or will it be in the next scheduled filing - our 2Q between 15-20 Aug?
My guess is there is a news gag agreement as part of the deal. GERS and ICM have to be quiet for a while so the focus is on GPRE. GPRE seems smart enough to insist - that since they are the customer - the PR will be about them. GPRE is paying the bills so they can make the rules. They are a public company and have a legitimate interest in getting their message out to their investors - Not have two litigants drown them out. So I expect after a reasonable time both GERS and ICM will present their sides in appropriate PRs.
SkunK's Take on this:
This is GREAT NEWS, details to follow!
SkunK
A little about Green Plains
Here is basic infomation on the Ethanol Plants (with a picture) and their Ethanol capacity. I also provided a SkunK estimate on the number of Method I COES to be deployed at each.
1. Bluffton, IN 110mmgy -2
2. Central City, NE Capacity: 100mmgy -2
3. Rives, TN Capacity: 110mmgy -2
4. Ord, NE Capacity: Ord-50mmgy - 1
5. Shenandoah, IA Capacity: 55mmgy - 1
6. Superior, IA Capacity: 55mmgy - 1
Total Capacity - 480mmgy.
Total SkunK estimated Method 1 COES deployed = 9
***************
Previous COES under new Licensed Contract and estimated Method I COES just this year:
Global Ethanol Lakota, IA 100mmgy - 2
Marquis Energy Hennepin, Il 100mmgy - 2
United Ethanol Milton WI 50mmgy -1
****************
This is a name plate capacity of about 730mmgy of Ethanol production under contract just this year. It looks like GreenShift is now within a stone's throw of their BILLION gallon goal for this year. As important (or more so) follow on to this - is this means that when these all come on line by the end of the first quarter 2011 they will be on the cusp of profitability. This is a huge step - nearly doubling our contracts in one fell swoop! I suspect that the momentum this develops will only make future contracts that much easier to land. I think we are by no means done for the year - this is the start of the begining . . .
SkunK
1. Bluffton, IN 110mmgy -2
2. Central City, NE Capacity: 100mmgy -2
3. Rives, TN Capacity: 110mmgy -2
4. Ord, NE Capacity: Ord-50mmgy - 1
5. Shenandoah, IA Capacity: 55mmgy - 1
6. Superior, IA Capacity: 55mmgy - 1
Total Capacity - 480mmgy.
Total SkunK estimated Method 1 COES deployed = 9
***************
Previous COES under new Licensed Contract and estimated Method I COES just this year:
Global Ethanol Lakota, IA 100mmgy - 2
Marquis Energy Hennepin, Il 100mmgy - 2
United Ethanol Milton WI 50mmgy -1
****************
This is a name plate capacity of about 730mmgy of Ethanol production under contract just this year. It looks like GreenShift is now within a stone's throw of their BILLION gallon goal for this year. As important (or more so) follow on to this - is this means that when these all come on line by the end of the first quarter 2011 they will be on the cusp of profitability. This is a huge step - nearly doubling our contracts in one fell swoop! I suspect that the momentum this develops will only make future contracts that much easier to land. I think we are by no means done for the year - this is the start of the begining . . .
SkunK
GREAT NEWS!!!!!!
THIS IS BIG NEWS!!!!
Green Plains has entered into a license agreement with GS CleanTech Corporation, a subsidiary of GreenShift Corporation, to utilize its patents and pending patents.
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. is North America's fourth largest ethanol producer, operating a total of six ethanol plants in Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Tennessee with annual expected operating capacity totaling approximately 480 million gallons.
The Company anticipates first revenues from corn oil extraction at the Obion, Tennessee plant to occur within the next 90 days.
The Company expects to complete the technology deployment by the end of the first quarter of 2011. . .
*********************
Gents this is a big deal. Not just the market penetration. Not just the added COES. Not just the revenue. This is a significant nod to the strength of the GreenShift patents by a major player in the Ethanol Industry. The SkunK expects the path to GreenShift and its patented COES to soon turn into a well worn freeway.
GreenShift PRESS ROOM
And HERE
And HERE
Here is a 12 July FOX business interview with Todd Becker - the CEO of Green Plains
(on Ethano Industry - no GERS mention)
SkunK
PS - Speaking of Revenues. Green Plains Renewable Energy anticipates the project would enhance operating income by $15 million to $19 million per year. This may increase GreenShift's bottom line between $3-4+ million a year well into the future. GreenShift's market Cap today is below $2 million.
There are six plants. But with 480mmgy of Ethanol being produced - that is about nine or ten additional COES. (One per 50mmgy of production). With over +300mmgy already under new contracts and now an additional 480mmgy today- GreenShift is well on its way to its goal of a billion new gallons of Ethanol production under COES contract - this year!! This year indeed!
Green Plains has entered into a license agreement with GS CleanTech Corporation, a subsidiary of GreenShift Corporation, to utilize its patents and pending patents.
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. is North America's fourth largest ethanol producer, operating a total of six ethanol plants in Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Tennessee with annual expected operating capacity totaling approximately 480 million gallons.
The Company anticipates first revenues from corn oil extraction at the Obion, Tennessee plant to occur within the next 90 days.
The Company expects to complete the technology deployment by the end of the first quarter of 2011. . .
*********************
Gents this is a big deal. Not just the market penetration. Not just the added COES. Not just the revenue. This is a significant nod to the strength of the GreenShift patents by a major player in the Ethanol Industry. The SkunK expects the path to GreenShift and its patented COES to soon turn into a well worn freeway.
GreenShift PRESS ROOM
And HERE
And HERE
Here is a 12 July FOX business interview with Todd Becker - the CEO of Green Plains
(on Ethano Industry - no GERS mention)
SkunK
PS - Speaking of Revenues. Green Plains Renewable Energy anticipates the project would enhance operating income by $15 million to $19 million per year. This may increase GreenShift's bottom line between $3-4+ million a year well into the future. GreenShift's market Cap today is below $2 million.
There are six plants. But with 480mmgy of Ethanol being produced - that is about nine or ten additional COES. (One per 50mmgy of production). With over +300mmgy already under new contracts and now an additional 480mmgy today- GreenShift is well on its way to its goal of a billion new gallons of Ethanol production under COES contract - this year!! This year indeed!
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Near ISSUE of Third Patent???
1. 6 May 2009 GERS receives Notice of Allowance for first Patents
2. U.S. Patent 7,601,858 issued 13 Oct 2009
3. U.S. Patent 7,608,729 issued 27 Oct 2009
We can see above that it took between 5-6 months between the Notice of Allowance and the issue of the first and second COES patents.
We are now in this sweet spot for the third patent - and will be for the next month.
4. 16 Feb 2010 Notice Of Allowance Issued For Third GreenShift Corn Oil Extraction Patent
Will we soon see an ISSUE of Patent #3?
SkunK
It should be seen HERE first.
2. U.S. Patent 7,601,858 issued 13 Oct 2009
3. U.S. Patent 7,608,729 issued 27 Oct 2009
We can see above that it took between 5-6 months between the Notice of Allowance and the issue of the first and second COES patents.
We are now in this sweet spot for the third patent - and will be for the next month.
4. 16 Feb 2010 Notice Of Allowance Issued For Third GreenShift Corn Oil Extraction Patent
Will we soon see an ISSUE of Patent #3?
SkunK
It should be seen HERE first.
Its Ten to One!
On July 19, 2010, GreenShift Corporation (the “Company”) filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware a certificate of amendment to the Company’s certificate of incorporation to give effect to a 1-for-10 reverse stock split (the “Reverse Split”) as of 6:00 p.m. on August 2, 2010. The Company has submitted to FINRA the requisite notification of the corporate action. There were 17,411,564,435 shares of Company common stock outstanding as of July 16, 2010, an amount which corresponds to an estimated 1,741,156,444 shares of Company common stock outstanding after completion of the Reverse Split.
SEE ALL HERE
SkunK
SEE ALL HERE
SkunK
Sunday, July 18, 2010
GREENSHIFT CORP Financials
The GreenShift Financial Sheet was released yesterday. Although this is just a compilation of previous information, one thing especially caught my eye.
Notice the 40% drop in interest expense over the last two annual reports. Also the 30% drop in interest expense between the 4Q 2009 and 1Q 2010. Hopefully this trend continues when the 2Q is released between 15-20 August 2010.
SEE HERE
SkunK
Notice the 40% drop in interest expense over the last two annual reports. Also the 30% drop in interest expense between the 4Q 2009 and 1Q 2010. Hopefully this trend continues when the 2Q is released between 15-20 August 2010.
SEE HERE
SkunK
Friday, July 16, 2010
Form 8-K for SOUTHWEST IOWA RENEWABLE ENERGY, LLC
Looks like ICM may have found a buyer for the Tricanter centrifuges listed on their website blowout sale?!? Notice this is not a promise to defend the tricanter and the new owners. It is just an agreement to share information - well sort of . . .
2. Exchange of Information. Each Party in its sole discretion may provide the other Party with Joint Defense Materials, which the providing Party believes will further the joint and common effort in the prosecution and defense of the Patent Litigation, but neither Party shall be obligated to provide such information to the other Party.
*************************
Here is their "Secret Agreement". SECRET??? Well if you go to item 15 you see that thisis was (supposed to be) a confidential agreement. Whoops!
"15. Confidentiality of Agreement. This Agreement is confidential, and the Parties expressly agree that this Agreement is part of the joint defense of the Patent Litigation, and the efforts by the Parties to protect their common legal interest. Accordingly, this Agreement shall not be disclosed or produced to third parties."
Is it just the SkunK?? But if you wanted to keep it a secret should you have filed it on the public side of the SEC filings??? OK, so its possible that their are secret provisions that were not disclosed, but if not then it seems this might be a rocky start to a new relationship?
SEE HERE
My guess is they will take it down as soon as they can - so make your copies now if you want a hard copy of their "Confidential" agreement.
The SkunK also found these parts very interesting:
*********
WHEREAS, in the event that SIRE purchase Tricanter Equipment from ICM, the parties acknowledge that SIRE may be sued by GS Cleantech Corporation and/or Greenshift Corporation for patent infringement.
*********
11. Independent Defense. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit or interfere with the right and ability of a Party to conduct its own independent prosecution or defense of the Patent Litigation, including filing appropriate motions, conducting separate and independent discovery, entering into individual settlements or otherwise engaging in pre-trial procedures for the benefit of the Party.
*********
12. Status of Agreement Privileged. This Agreement, its terms, the fact of its execution, and all discussions between the Parties, their respective counsel, officers, directors, agents, consultants, representatives and employees with respect to this Agreement are themselves privileged and confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product doctrine and any other applicable privilege or immunity. The provisions of this Agreement apply to any request or demand seeking disclosure of this Agreement, its terms, its execution, or any discussions between the parties relating to it.
*********************
Here is the part that the SkunK believes was meant to be public.
Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
On July 13, 2010, Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, LLC ("SIRE") and ICM, Inc. ("ICM") entered into a Joint Defense Agreement (the "Joint Defense Agreement"). Under the Joint Defense Agreement, SIRE and ICM contemplate that SIRE may purchase from ICM one or more Tricanter centrifuges (the "Tricanter Equipment"). The Tricanter Equipment is used to extract non-food grade corn oil from the backend of the ethanol production process. The Tricanter Equipment has been and is subject to (i) a declaratory judgment action filed by ICM in October 2009 seeking a declaration that the Tricanter Equipment does not infringe certain patents held by GS Cleantech Corporation ("GS Cleantech") and Greenshift Corporation and (ii) civil actions filed by GS Cleantech against third parties asserting, among other things, that the Tricanter Equipment infringes one or more patents held by GS Cleantech and/or Greenshift Corporation (such litigation and similar potential litigation involving SIRE, collectively, the "Patent Litigation"). As a result of the Patent Litigation, SIRE and ICM agreed in the Joint Defense Agreement as follows: (i) that the parties may, but are not obligated to, share information and materials that are relevant to the common prosecution and/or defense of any such Patent Litigation regarding the Tricanter Equipment (the "Joint Defense Materials"), (ii) that any such shared Joint Defense Materials will be and remain confidential, privileged and protected (unless such Joint Defense Materials cease to be privileged, protected or confidential through no violation of the Joint Defense Agreement), (iii) upon receipt of a request or demand for disclosure of Joint Defense Material to a third party, the party receiving such request or demand will consult with the party that provided the Joint Defense Materials and if the party that supplied the Joint Defense Materials does not consent to such disclosure then the other party will seek to protect any disclosure of such materials, (iv) that neither party will disclose Joint Defense Materials to a third party without a court order or the consent of the party who initially supplied the Joint Defense Materials, (v) that access to Joint Defense Materials will be restricted to each party's outside attorneys, in-house counsel, and retained consultants, (vi) that Joint Defense Materials will be stored in secured areas and will be used only to assist in prosecution and defense of the Patent Litigation and (vii) if there is a dispute between SIRE and ICM, then each party waives its right to claim that the other party's legal counsel should be disqualified by reason of this Agreement or receipt of Joint Defense Materials. The Joint Defense Agreement will terminate the earlier to occur of (i) upon final resolution of the Patent Litigation and (ii) a party providing ten (10) days advance written notice to the other party of its intent to withdraw from the Joint Defense Agreement.
SEE HERE
SkunK
2. Exchange of Information. Each Party in its sole discretion may provide the other Party with Joint Defense Materials, which the providing Party believes will further the joint and common effort in the prosecution and defense of the Patent Litigation, but neither Party shall be obligated to provide such information to the other Party.
*************************
Here is their "Secret Agreement". SECRET??? Well if you go to item 15 you see that this
"15. Confidentiality of Agreement. This Agreement is confidential, and the Parties expressly agree that this Agreement is part of the joint defense of the Patent Litigation, and the efforts by the Parties to protect their common legal interest. Accordingly, this Agreement shall not be disclosed or produced to third parties."
Is it just the SkunK?? But if you wanted to keep it a secret should you have filed it on the public side of the SEC filings??? OK, so its possible that their are secret provisions that were not disclosed, but if not then it seems this might be a rocky start to a new relationship?
SEE HERE
My guess is they will take it down as soon as they can - so make your copies now if you want a hard copy of their "Confidential" agreement.
The SkunK also found these parts very interesting:
*********
WHEREAS, in the event that SIRE purchase Tricanter Equipment from ICM, the parties acknowledge that SIRE may be sued by GS Cleantech Corporation and/or Greenshift Corporation for patent infringement.
*********
11. Independent Defense. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit or interfere with the right and ability of a Party to conduct its own independent prosecution or defense of the Patent Litigation, including filing appropriate motions, conducting separate and independent discovery, entering into individual settlements or otherwise engaging in pre-trial procedures for the benefit of the Party.
*********
12. Status of Agreement Privileged. This Agreement, its terms, the fact of its execution, and all discussions between the Parties, their respective counsel, officers, directors, agents, consultants, representatives and employees with respect to this Agreement are themselves privileged and confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product doctrine and any other applicable privilege or immunity. The provisions of this Agreement apply to any request or demand seeking disclosure of this Agreement, its terms, its execution, or any discussions between the parties relating to it.
*********************
Here is the part that the SkunK believes was meant to be public.
Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
On July 13, 2010, Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, LLC ("SIRE") and ICM, Inc. ("ICM") entered into a Joint Defense Agreement (the "Joint Defense Agreement"). Under the Joint Defense Agreement, SIRE and ICM contemplate that SIRE may purchase from ICM one or more Tricanter centrifuges (the "Tricanter Equipment"). The Tricanter Equipment is used to extract non-food grade corn oil from the backend of the ethanol production process. The Tricanter Equipment has been and is subject to (i) a declaratory judgment action filed by ICM in October 2009 seeking a declaration that the Tricanter Equipment does not infringe certain patents held by GS Cleantech Corporation ("GS Cleantech") and Greenshift Corporation and (ii) civil actions filed by GS Cleantech against third parties asserting, among other things, that the Tricanter Equipment infringes one or more patents held by GS Cleantech and/or Greenshift Corporation (such litigation and similar potential litigation involving SIRE, collectively, the "Patent Litigation"). As a result of the Patent Litigation, SIRE and ICM agreed in the Joint Defense Agreement as follows: (i) that the parties may, but are not obligated to, share information and materials that are relevant to the common prosecution and/or defense of any such Patent Litigation regarding the Tricanter Equipment (the "Joint Defense Materials"), (ii) that any such shared Joint Defense Materials will be and remain confidential, privileged and protected (unless such Joint Defense Materials cease to be privileged, protected or confidential through no violation of the Joint Defense Agreement), (iii) upon receipt of a request or demand for disclosure of Joint Defense Material to a third party, the party receiving such request or demand will consult with the party that provided the Joint Defense Materials and if the party that supplied the Joint Defense Materials does not consent to such disclosure then the other party will seek to protect any disclosure of such materials, (iv) that neither party will disclose Joint Defense Materials to a third party without a court order or the consent of the party who initially supplied the Joint Defense Materials, (v) that access to Joint Defense Materials will be restricted to each party's outside attorneys, in-house counsel, and retained consultants, (vi) that Joint Defense Materials will be stored in secured areas and will be used only to assist in prosecution and defense of the Patent Litigation and (vii) if there is a dispute between SIRE and ICM, then each party waives its right to claim that the other party's legal counsel should be disqualified by reason of this Agreement or receipt of Joint Defense Materials. The Joint Defense Agreement will terminate the earlier to occur of (i) upon final resolution of the Patent Litigation and (ii) a party providing ten (10) days advance written notice to the other party of its intent to withdraw from the Joint Defense Agreement.
SEE HERE
SkunK
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Adkins Energy LLC Update
The actual 7 page complaint filed yesterday is right HERE.
The next scheduled happening in this Adkins Energy suit was decided today and is right HERE.
*****************
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, July 15, 2010:9/15/2010 at 09:00 AM, courtroom 2119. Mailed notice(etv, )
MINUTE entry before Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer: Status hearing set for
*****************
SkunK
The next scheduled happening in this Adkins Energy suit was decided today and is right HERE.
*****************
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, July 15, 2010:9/15/2010 at 09:00 AM, courtroom 2119. Mailed notice(etv, )
MINUTE entry before Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer: Status hearing set for
*****************
SkunK
GS Cleantech Corporation v. Adkins Energy LLC
The SkunK gave readers a heads up that Adkins Energy was running a non-patented COES in a blog on Wednesday, May 19, 2010. That blog was based on a reader's tip, and we were able to nail it down with their permiting records . . .
LOOKS LIKE GreenShift has now just filed a patent infringement suit against Adkins Energy LLC
**************
RFC Case Number: P-G10-4391A
Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-04391
File Date: Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Plaintiff: GS Cleantech Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: Joseph P. Bonavita, Robert A. Carson of Gould & Ratner
Michael J. Rye, Charles F. O'Brien of Cantor Colburn LLP
Defendant: Adkins Energy LLC
Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Court: Illinois Northern District Court
Judge: Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer
Date # Docket Text
7/14/2010 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff GS Cleantech Corporation by Joseph Paul Bonavita (Bonavita, Joseph) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff GS Cleantech Corporation by Robert A. Carson (Carson, Robert) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Carson, Robert) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 1 COMPLAINT For Patent Infringement filed by GS Cleantech Corporation; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 0752-5013232. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Carson, Robert) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Adkins Energy LLC. (ef, ) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Susan E. Cox. (emd, ) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
********************
SEE HERE
Background HERE, and HERE
Looks like Adkins LLC also had an early planned history with GreenShift in 2006 - and then fell off the radar? - till now?
SkunK
LOOKS LIKE GreenShift has now just filed a patent infringement suit against Adkins Energy LLC
**************
RFC Case Number: P-G10-4391A
Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-04391
File Date: Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Plaintiff: GS Cleantech Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: Joseph P. Bonavita, Robert A. Carson of Gould & Ratner
Michael J. Rye, Charles F. O'Brien of Cantor Colburn LLP
Defendant: Adkins Energy LLC
Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Court: Illinois Northern District Court
Judge: Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer
Date # Docket Text
7/14/2010 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff GS Cleantech Corporation by Joseph Paul Bonavita (Bonavita, Joseph) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff GS Cleantech Corporation by Robert A. Carson (Carson, Robert) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Carson, Robert) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 1 COMPLAINT For Patent Infringement filed by GS Cleantech Corporation; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 0752-5013232. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Carson, Robert) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Adkins Energy LLC. (ef, ) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
7/14/2010 CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Susan E. Cox. (emd, ) (Entered: 07/14/2010)
********************
SEE HERE
Background HERE, and HERE
Looks like Adkins LLC also had an early planned history with GreenShift in 2006 - and then fell off the radar? - till now?
SkunK
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Encouraging numbers for corn oil feedstock
Dave Winsness is quoted in the August 2010 Issue of BIODIESEL MAGAZINE:
Panel speakers discussed back-end coproduct optimization for ethanol plants at the 2010 International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo in St. Louis in June. In recent times, more biodiesel producers have incorporated use of post-fermentation corn oil, extracted from ethanol plant stillage, as a biodiesel feedstock.
The chief technology officer for Greenshift Corp., David Winsness, said only about 4 MMgy of post-ferm corn oil was being extracted from whole stillage at U.S. ethanol plants in May 2007. Two years later, however, that number grew to 33 MMgy. By May 2010 as much as 44 MMgy of post-ferm corn oil was removed and sold as biodiesel feedstock or for other uses. Winsness said by 2022, it is expected that up to 680 MMgy of post-ferm corn oil will be siphoned from the back-end of U.S. ethanol plants.
SEE ARTICLE HERE
SkunK
Panel speakers discussed back-end coproduct optimization for ethanol plants at the 2010 International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo in St. Louis in June. In recent times, more biodiesel producers have incorporated use of post-fermentation corn oil, extracted from ethanol plant stillage, as a biodiesel feedstock.
The chief technology officer for Greenshift Corp., David Winsness, said only about 4 MMgy of post-ferm corn oil was being extracted from whole stillage at U.S. ethanol plants in May 2007. Two years later, however, that number grew to 33 MMgy. By May 2010 as much as 44 MMgy of post-ferm corn oil was removed and sold as biodiesel feedstock or for other uses. Winsness said by 2022, it is expected that up to 680 MMgy of post-ferm corn oil will be siphoned from the back-end of U.S. ethanol plants.
SEE ARTICLE HERE
SkunK
Friday, July 9, 2010
STIPULATION OF DISMISAL OF CENTER ETHANOL COMPANY, LLC
Looks like GreenShift and Central have come to an understanding: - dismiss with prejudice all claims.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff, GS CleanTech Corporation, by its undersigned counsel, and Defendant, Center Ethanol Company, LLC, by its undersigned counsel, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby dismiss with prejudice all claims asserted by and between GS CleanTech Corporation and Center Ethanol Company, LLC, with each party bearing its own costs and attorney's fees.
SEE HERE
***************************
We cannot say for sure what this means, and I have no inside information. However, we can look at this logically:
Who initiated this lawsuit and why?
GreenShift, and because it was in GreenShift's self-interest to do so.
Who initiated the end of the lawsuit and why?
No judge said to drop it - GreenShift decided on its own. The only reasonable explanation is GreenShift decided to drop the suit because it was in GreenShift's self-interest to do so.
If you follow me so far then the question becomes:
How could it be in GreenShift's self-interest to drop the suit?
I can only think of two plausible reasons why it would be in GreenShift's self-interest to drop the suit. Again these are just my best guesses based on my logic . . .
1. Central Ethanol has signed up as a licensed customer of GreenShift. GreenShift will likely want some good news to be released with any reverse split or IPO. This could be a part of that good news being set for release.
2. GreenShift found out during "discovery" that for some reason Central Ethanol was not extracting corn oil or was not in violation of the GreenShift Patents.
SkunK
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff, GS CleanTech Corporation, by its undersigned counsel, and Defendant, Center Ethanol Company, LLC, by its undersigned counsel, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby dismiss with prejudice all claims asserted by and between GS CleanTech Corporation and Center Ethanol Company, LLC, with each party bearing its own costs and attorney's fees.
SEE HERE
***************************
We cannot say for sure what this means, and I have no inside information. However, we can look at this logically:
Who initiated this lawsuit and why?
GreenShift, and because it was in GreenShift's self-interest to do so.
Who initiated the end of the lawsuit and why?
No judge said to drop it - GreenShift decided on its own. The only reasonable explanation is GreenShift decided to drop the suit because it was in GreenShift's self-interest to do so.
If you follow me so far then the question becomes:
How could it be in GreenShift's self-interest to drop the suit?
I can only think of two plausible reasons why it would be in GreenShift's self-interest to drop the suit. Again these are just my best guesses based on my logic . . .
1. Central Ethanol has signed up as a licensed customer of GreenShift. GreenShift will likely want some good news to be released with any reverse split or IPO. This could be a part of that good news being set for release.
2. GreenShift found out during "discovery" that for some reason Central Ethanol was not extracting corn oil or was not in violation of the GreenShift Patents.
SkunK
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Suckling Fawn Update - Twins
Sorry to report its not all peach coppler and cream up here in the NorthWoods. 
Here is an overhead picture of a garden snake I took from my deck. It appears he had Mr. Frog over for dinner. Hope I didn't ruin yours . . .
Here is an overhead picture of a garden snake I took from my deck. It appears he had Mr. Frog over for dinner. Hope I didn't ruin yours . . .I have been following the GreenShift story and will report when I get something new, although I admit I have spent a bunch of time on the water lately. Sun burnt and sore. lol. Happy Forth of July!
SkunK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
