Wednesday, October 5, 2011


The picture above is missing something.  See all Here


PS.  I expect another filing when it has been served.  Then within 21 days after that - the response filing will be fascinating.  Will it shed some rare light upon the internal workings of ICM, a private company?  One of the possible defenses is the decision to infringe was made by someone else.  I cannot see that defense made. 

Will the defendant continue to argue invalidity/Prevost after the Markman rulings?  No matter the question - that has always been the answer in the past.  I cannot see that ol'Prevost defense being made after what the court just said.  It is kinda interesting GreenShift (or was it the court that issued the summons?) waited until AFTER ICM's owner complained that he had not yet been served - AND after the Markman obliterated Prevost - to serve the obvious decision maker. 

Will the defendant simply try to impeach the inventors to answer the reason for his decision?  If ICM has some information that the inventors need to explain - how can that justify his decision to infringe before he had the information about the inventors?  If this argument is made then it will really show a desperate attempt to deflect.  OK, so the SkunK will predict this will be the path they take.  It appears to my non-legal mind that that's all they got left. 

I also expect them to throw in a prior legal opinion by some law firm.  A paying client can shop for an opinion and get a legal firm to write down friendly legal advice.  Then the client can say that they were acting on the legal advice - so even though they were wrong - it is not soooo bad since they were merely acting on legal advice.  The problem with this for the SkunK is it can obviously be done with intent to establish an alibi before the crime (metaphor? you decide). 

Since this system of getting a legal opinion is fee based, lawyers may be clapping, however juries may be unimpressed.  At the very least this may be viewed by a normal common sense individual (i.e. jury)as an attempt to CYA - with prior knowledge you were skating on thin ice.

In my opinion -  GreenShift lawyers have perfectly set up this personal response to a legal question - AFTER all his answers have been taken away.  

When the best answer left is settlement - will it happen?


Anonymous said...

DVG has now been served. This puts him in a real tough spot. Any attempts to wiggle out of personal responsibility while his clients are still on the hook won't look good.
I understand hes a very proud, stubborn guy but he should settle and get himself out of this mess somewhat gracefully.Ollie

wayback said...

wow, a lot to be done and a lot to focus on, that can be the reason why gers haven't said a word,, just let them do what they have to do, and when they are ready they will speak,,kind of like apple

nobody12378 said...

Response of an intellectual property attorney to my question about the nature of the personal civil action here:

When asserting indirect infringement, it's a certainly a valid tactic. Particularly if you're trying to force a settlement. Normally, a corporate executive is shielded from corporate liability for direct infringement by the corporate veil. But if it can be shown that that the executive's actions were what caused the infringement, the executive might liable under various indirect infringement theories. The important thing in this regard is that indirect/contributory infringers are sued in their individual capacity and are not protected by the corporate veil.

Anonymous said...

A new crop is coming in. Let all the corn storage units get filled prior to asserting any monetary action. That way there are liquid assets to dissolve.

Anonymous said...

new crop is right.

what will drag these people to a settlement is is will get harder and harder for them to do business as their creditors slowly turn off the spickets trying to save their investments from a ruling.

Who will borrow them money to buy that corn crop when the corn might get used as part of a judement and leave them hanging with the bills. Money will move the infringers even if doing the right thing doesn't. They will be forced to as credit drys up.

Anonymous said...

How can compensation due GERS be computed?...ICM has created this massive destructive trap for GERS...How much money will remedy all this?

Anonymous said...

Sold all my shares today and walked away with 16 bucks. I found something better to invest in, no lawsuits no losses and etc. We all make mistakes but I can't stand the smell anymore I got to move on. Good luck to you all.

Anonymous said...

Have fun buddy. Your gonna be the guy who didnt put money in the office pool the one day it hits the lottery. Wondering if I had any balls and road it out I may have made some money. Have fun buying dinner at burger long

Anonymous said...

If Icm is forced to give up some ethanol plants as part of a settlement, will Adarna get any piece of that?

Anonymous said...

Wow, Adarna. Nice theory here.

Anonymous said...

Is that the same house he was chopping up evidence and flushing it down the drain in?

Anonymous said...

I heard the drain got plugged and they had to call in roto roter.

Anonymous said...

"damages are accruing at alarming rates"

I love skunks quotes

When you're one step ahead of the crowd you're a genius. When you're two steps ahead, you're a crackpot.
--Rabbi Shlomo Riskin

First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
-- Gandhi

Remember the only reason the herd is on the move is because they finally figured out the last place they rushed off to was wrong! -- SkunK

Git your dirty feet off the furniture! -- Mrs. SkunK

Free Blog CounterTamron