ICM's New Patent Pending

As of 3 November 2011 ICM has a new patent pending published called "ROTARY TORREFACTION REACTOR" HERE

The SkunK has been on the look out for the publishing of the "patent pending" ICM AOS system.  As you may be familiar there is a normal time period where the patent has been submitted but not yet published - and it appears we are in that period now since I can find no record yet of the AOS system. ICM announced the submission of their application on May 17.   When one does a search using "ICM, Inc" as "assignee name" in a patent application search they find these 5 applications, none of which seems to be the AOS - yet. 

Importantly, the patent application ROTARY TORREFACTION REACTOR, described below was filed two weeks (3 May) before the AOS application was announced - and here it is already published.  Therefore we should expect to see the publishing of the AOS patent pending system in the next few weeks - unless of course they run into some problems . . .

Here is the best summary I could find on what this thing does, links to concepts below:

"The reactor, along with the network of conduit 175, rotates on its horizontal axis. Biomass introduced into the interior of the reactor comes into contact with the conduits while being tumbled. The tumbling action, and the slight pitch of the axis, carries the biomass through the length of the reactor while roasting the biomass at controlled temperature, and upon discharge from the reactor, the biomass material has become torrefied."

TORREFACTION
Pyrolysis

SkunK

Could the "biomass" used here be DDGs?? Certainly, but that does not seem to be the focus.  DDGs are now a valuable feedstock with a worldwide market and are now far from the original "waste" product they were considered to be at the very start of the industry.

PS.  Remember not so long ago when silly arguments were being made by seemingly serious people that GreenShift COES used centrifuge technology over a hundred years old and was therefore obvious and unpatentable?????  (Haven't heard it lately!)  Well, the device above seems to be just a combination of simple machines in common usage since the middle ages.  Heat has been used as a process catalyst since the stone age.   For some reason I do not hear the same line of logic applied.  lol

PSS Just so you know I'm not blow'n smoke Here is an example of the argument (p.1) to which I refer in the PS above:

"Westfalia has been developing, manufacturing, and delivering products used for mechanically separating liquids or liquids and solids, including several different types of centrifuges, since 1893. Westfalia centrifuges are used in a wide variety of industries to separate oil from other liquids. For decades, these machines have been operating in processes substantially identical to that claimed in the ‘858 Patent. Consequently, CleanTech’s purportedly novel oil extraction technology has been known and used for decades."

Since this argument has now seemingly all but disappeared from the filings, PRs and in the comment sections, I tend to think it may have just been directed towards potential [or to stiffen the resolve of weak-kneed current] customers, rather than a serious legal argument.