Aemetis tells its Stakeholders

1. Legal Proceedings . . .

 

On August 4, 2013, GS Cleantech Corporation, a subsidiary of Greenshift Corporation, filed a complaint in the United States District for the Eastern District of California Fresno Division against the Company and its subsidiary, Aemetis Advanced Fuels Keyes, Inc. The complaint alleges infringement of patent rights assigned to it that pertain to certain corn oil extraction processes the Company employs. The corn oil extraction process is licensed to Company by Valicor Separation Technologies LLC, formerly called Solution Recovery Services LLC.  The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued a Conditional Transfer Order transferring the complaint to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana because it appeared that the complaint involves questions of fact that are common to over a dozen complaints filed by Greenshift against other defendants and have been pending for over three years. On September 12, 2013, the Company, along with its subsidiary, filed its answer and counterclaims with the Southern District Court of Indiana. However, in the multi-district litigation, all patent claim construction has been concluded, all discoveries is closed but for a limited scope related to inequitable conduct by Greenshift, and both parties have filed summary judgment motions and briefs related to patent infringement and validity. This posture leaves Company little opportunity to mount its own defense or conduct any discovery. For that reason, the Company filed a motion asking the multi-district litigation court to suggest a remand back to the Eastern District of California where the complaint was originally filed. The Company expects that the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana will provide a scheduling order in the near future which will allow Greenshift and Company to conduct limited discovery as needed but it is likely that such discovery will not begin until after the Court has ruled on the pending summary judgment motions and Company's motion for a suggestion for remand back to California.

Greenshift is seeking royalties, damages and possibly triple damages, and attorney's fees from the Company, as well as a preliminary and permanent injunction precluding the Company from infringing the patent. The process provider, SRS, has no obligations to indemnify Company. We estimate that damages being sought in this litigation are based on a reasonable royalty to or lost profits of Greenshift, beginning on the date Company first began separating corn oil or on the date the first Greenshift patent issued, whichever is later. If the court deems the case exceptional, attorneys' fees may be awarded and damages with attorney's fees would likely be $1 million or more. The Company expects to mount a vigorous defense. If the Company is not successful in its defense, Company would be liable for damages and at least its own attorneys' fees. The Company's counterclaims are expected to include invalidity due to obviousness, non- infringement, and inequitable conduct, which are also presently the subjects of the summary judgment motions pending in the multidistrict litigation. We are not currently able to predict the outcome of this litigation against the Company with any degree of certainty.   p.35

 

SEE HERE
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/738214/000135448813006007/amtx_10q.htm
 

 

SkunK

 

Not a simple copy/paste above.  Hope I got all the punctuation and the rest right.