Monday, August 5, 2013


See Here

See Here


I will be amaized if the judge allows the defendants to self-limit their discovery.    I expect the gavel to fall hard on somebody's fingers.


nobody123789 said...

Any one still not convinced of their strategy -- delay, delay followed by more delay, followed by appeals, more Writs, more motions ...? Can GERS survive until any closure occurs and money changes hands? That is the $120,000,000 question.

Anonymous said...

The court has all the information it needs to weigh summary judgment in Gers' favor. Hopefully they will say so after they dismiss the final invalidity contentions pretaining to on sale bar?

Anonymous said...

The legal system is a service...They look to make money...That is all folks...

nobody123789 said...

OK, we have a very slight, almost unnoticeable, uptick in the PPS. Will we see the dilution selling into this as we have every other uptick of any kind for the past many years?

Anonymous said...

agree, this could NOT be called justice in any stretch....gers has been screwed over by the 'legal' biz!

Anonymous said...

n0b0dy back basibg hahah i woned mad times he losr kant play stock market

Slashnuts said...

GreenShift Sues SIRE!$!$!$!$!$

This just makes my day! I've been waiting a long time for this particular plant to be sued. I drive by it, in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on a daily basis. It's partly owned by ICM and Bunge(BG). Now I can drive by it with a huge grin on my face knowing they're officially being brought to justice. It was at this plants annual meeting that I informed investors/farmers that SIRE was stealing patented technology.
I will be making a lot of noise around town about this lawsuit, including an article in the Omaha World Herald.

Good Luck To All!$!$!$!$!$!$!$

RFC Case Number: P-G13-21S
Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00021-JAJ-CFB
File Date: Monday, August 05, 2013
Plaintiff: GS CleanTech Corporation

Plaintiff Counsel: Gregory G Barntsen, Jacob C. Langeveld of Smith Peterson Law Firm, LLP
Andrew C. Ryan of Cantor Colburn, LLP

Defendant: Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, LLC

Cause: 15:1126 Patent Infringement
Court: Iowa Southern District Court
Judge: Judge John A. Jarvey
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Celeste F. Bremer

nobody123789 said...


Make sure in your op ed piece that you mention that all these law suits against all these dastardly villains have only achieved, so far, a continuous plummeting PPS.

Slashnuts said...

It's Official, GERS Sues BG Plant for Patent Infringement!

As I predicted 2 years ago, GERS has finally sued SIRE, an ethanol plant across the highway from BG's plant in Council Bluffs, Iowa. BG owns a good portion of this plant. It's also partly owned by ICM as well as local farmers. GERS is now suing BG for patent infringement of GERS' oil extraction technology.

"SIRE raised $74 million in total equity with [u]Bunge and ICM [/u]investing in the company, along with over 750 individual unit holders. Today SIRE membership is over 800 members, many of these individuals representing area farmers, local banks and other midwest agriculture business owners."

I'm extremely pleased with this news.

Anonymous said...

More of the same... It adds up to nothing but heavy losses for GERS investors. That's the reality.

nobody123789 said...

More of the same... It adds up to nothing but heavy losses for GERS investors. That's the reality.

Anonymous said...

Boy, it sure was nice for a month or so while Mr. Doom & Gloom was away!

nobody123789 said...

Sure thing, it was much easier to deceive yourself. BTW, I do not need to repeat, and I certainly do not stutter.

Anonymous said...

you repeat yourself like a parrot on crack^^

Anonymous said...

n0b0dy big parrot on cock

Slashnuts said...

Adding a Solvent Doesn't Avoid Infringement

ICM has refused to answer deposition questions related to the operation of it's AOS system in connection with oil extraction.

Defendants cannot be allowed to shield countless infringing corn oil extraction systems, simply by claiming that adding a solvent after the patented process avoids infringement.

Infringement occurs if ICM utilizes a centrifuge to separate a substance that is substantially oil from condensed thin stillage.

The published patent for the AOS system clearly depicts "concentrated stillage" entering a centrifuge and resulting in oil.

Plaintiff's July 1, 2013 letter specifically asks for ICM to provide a fully updated list of all ethanol production facilities for whom they have installed oil recovery systems that include a centrifuge, including those for whom ICM contends it has installed ICM's alleged Advanced Oil System.

Good Luck To All!$!$!$!$!$!$!$

Slashnuts said...

GreenShift: Fuel Ethanol Workshop 2013 Touts Method II

Method II is the future.

The washing method (method II) releases 1.5 pounds of oil per bushel from the wet cake.

In contrast, the infringing AOS releases roughly 1/3rd of that.

Method I - syrup extraction .5 to .9 pounds
Method II - wet cake extraction up to 1.5 pounds

Good Luck To All!$!$!$!$!$!$

Anonymous said...

Investors or gamblers whom can't stand to wait for return, if ever. GET OUT.
Don't forget to leave your money on the table.
Good ridence.
Complaining and whining gamblers that predict the future, sod off.

Slashnuts said...

Calgren: Pratt Restarts in The Next Month

Posted Jul. 25, 2013 @ 8:59 am

Pratt, Kan. —
After over five years of sitting idle, the ethanol plant north of Pratt is almost ready to start producing ethanol again.

"We're reasonably close," said Lyle Schlyer, president of Pratt Energy, the new group that will oversee plant operations. "Maybe late August but more likely early September."

Scoular, the company that operates the grain facility at the plant, will continue in that capacity. Scoular and Calgren Renewable Fuels are partners in Pratt Energy.

"We're delighted to have Scoular as a partner. We think their grain experience is a huge advantage." Schlyer said. "Each brings something valuable to the plant."

The 55-million gallon-a-year plant last ran in the middle of February 2008 before a combination of damage from an ice storm and financial issues forced the plant to take bankruptcy.

It has taken many months to get the plant back to operating status. As expected, the renovation process ran into some unforeseen problems. They had a lot of twists and turns and will probably have more but are confident they can deal with any issues.

"With a plant that has been idle for five years, we expected a few surprises and we weren't disappointed," Schlyer said. "But they (surprises) are manageable."

Pratt Energy has made an effort to hire as many local businesses as possible to work on the plant renovation.

"We've hired a lot of local contractors," Schlyer said.

Hiring is underway for the 35 to 40 employees needed to run the ethanol plant. Many have already been hired and are currently training at an operating ethanol plant in Pixley, Calif., that Calgren Renewable Fuels owns.

The Calgren plant in Pixley looks almost identical to the Pratt facility so for the people training in California it's almost like training in Pratt.

Pratt Energy is hiring locally as much as possible for the necessary skilled and semi-skilled positions necessary for plant operation.

"We're eager to hire as many local folks as we can. The stronger the roots in the community the better," Schlyer said.

The California plant underwent some renovations to make the plant more efficient. Those same modifications were made at the Pratt plant to gain the same operating efficiency.

"We had our troubles with the plant in California but we ended up with a nice operating plant." Schlyer said. "It runs well now and this one (Pratt plant) will too," Schlyer said.

Although Schlyer did not reveal the cost to get the plant up and running, he did concede that it was a considerable amount.

"There is a substantial cost for renovation," Schlyer said.

Getting the plant back in operation will benefit the county financially. It will increase grain values for local farmers. It will increase the number of truckers coming to the area that will purchase products in the Pratt area.

The money local people working at the plant will spend will also multiply in the community.

"I think it's great for Pratt. They have had to wait a long time for that (financial increase)," Schlyer said. "We don't want to make them wait any longer."

Schlyer said although he has no crystal ball, he sees a rosy future for the ethanol industry.

Ethanol is a cheaper fuel component than other additives petroleum refiners need for their blend stock.

With the clean air act, ethanol has place in the future. That future is why Calgren took the financial risk to get the Pratt plant up and running and producing ethanol.

"It has lots of potential. We don't see this as short term. We think it has good long term viability," Schlyer said.

Good Luck To All!$!$!$!$!$

nobody123789 said...


Aren't we going to need more than luck? Luck would be a "ten-bagger"; getting us to a penny. Getting back to post R/S level would require a "100-bagger". Getting to a level to where you and most longs could make some money on your investment, to $1, would be a "thousand-bagger". I'd say that we require more than luck; luck is now out of the discussion -- we need a thermonuclear explosion of good fortune. In the future, instead of GLTA, it should read TEGFR -- thermonuclear explosion of good fortune required! Isn't that what we really need?

Anonymous said...

Oh goodie! Mr. Gloom & Doom is already repeating himself! Expect to see the above message at least equal to a thermonuclear explosion number of times in the future!

Anonymous said...

Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. (ADM), the world’s largest corn processor, sees ethanol demand rising and is “optimistic” about margins for 2014 and 2015 as the coming U.S. harvest increases supplies.

Anonymous said...

The U.S. EPA finalized the much-anticipated 2013 percentage standards for the four fuel categories under the renewable fuel standard (RFS) program established by Congress. The final 2013 overall volumes and standards require 16.55 billion gallons of renewable fuels to be blended into the U.S. fuel supply (a 9.74 percent blend). This standard specifically requires 1.28 billion gallons of biomass-based diesel (1.13 percent), which was already finalized last year; 2.75 billion gallons of advanced biofuels (1.62 percent); and only 6 million gallons of cellulosic biofuels (0.004 percent). EPA stated that these standards reflect the agency’s updated production projections, “which are informed by extensive engagement with industry and a thorough assessment of the biofuels market.”

Since the volume requirements were finalized so late, EPA is extending the deadline to comply with the 2013 standards by four months, to June 30, 2014. “A January 2013 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals required the agency to reevaluate projections for cellulosic biofuel to reflect market conditions,” the EPA stated. “The final 2013 standard for cellulosic biofuel announced today was developed in a manner consistent with the approach outlined in that ruling.”

The National Biodiesel Board commended the agency for maintaining a strong 2013 advanced biofuel requirement under RFS.

“With this decision, the EPA is helping consumers, creating jobs and reducing emissions,” said Anne Steckel, NBB's vice president of federal affairs. “This target will clearly be met, and it will continue to diversify our fuel supplies so that we're not at the mercy of global oil markets every time we fill up at the pump.”

Under the RFS, advanced biofuels must reduce lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50 percent compared with petroleum fuels. Biodiesel is the first and only advanced biofuel under the program to reach commercial-scale production nationwide, and the first to break 1 billion gallons of annual volume.

With nearly 1.1 billion gallons of production last year, the biodiesel industry produced enough fuel to fill 87 percent of the total advanced requirement in 2012. The industry is on pace to fill a majority of the requirement again this year.

“Biodiesel is proving that advanced biofuels are working today and that they can reduce prices for consumers,” Steckel said. “The RFS is a critical component to that success, and today's rule will help stimulate new technologies and additional growth. Today's announcement also demonstrates that the EPA has tremendous flexibility in addressing concerns stemming from the various volume requirements under the RFS, and that it is prepared to use that flexibility in a practical way to ensure that the policy is running smoothly.”

EPA noted that during the rulemaking, it received comments from a number of stakeholders concerning the E10 blend wall. Projected to occur in 2014, the blend wall refers to the difficulty in incorporating ethanol into the fuel supply at volumes exceeding those achieved by the sale of nearly all gasoline as E10. Most gasoline sold in the U.S. today is E10. In the rule, EPA announced that it will propose to use flexibilities in the RFS statute to reduce both the advanced biofuel and total renewable volumes in the forthcoming 2014 RFS volume requirement proposal.

Anonymous said...

GERS $125,000,000 per year by 2015

Anonymous said...

GERS biodiesel king in 2014

Free Blog CounterTamron