As shown above, from the time the letter was first addressed, and before Cantrell’s deposition, it was CleanTech’s position that the July 31 letter was related to experimental use of the test module identified in the letter and that the invention was not reduced to practice in 2003. (Ex. 18, DX 617, Ex. 19, DX 618, Ex. 20, DX 619, Ex. 21, DX 622 and Ex. 22, DX 624) At their depositions, Cantrell and Winsness testified that reduction to practice took place in 2004 as a result of the full scale Agri Energy test. (See, e.g., Ex. 47, Winsness Dep. 1108:16-1109:10; (Ex. 23, Cantrell Dep. at 274:6-17 (stating in 2003 he was only “hopefully optimistic” about their process), 1068:23-1069:6 (stating Mesrss. Winsness and Barlage told him the large scale test would not work)) They also consistently testified that the July 31, 2003 letter was an attempt to set up a full scale test at Agri Energy.
The GERS Argument Here
The Exhibits in Support
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Status Conference now Feb 17th
A Medical Allowed Under Seal?
SkunK
Posts
26 comments:
I am now, more than ever, satisfied with the explanation of the on sale bar! As is the PTO. Vindication is right around the corner! Let this go to a jury trial!!!
GERS and Michael Rye give a compelling argument. After reading the entire rebuttal, I am feeling a little better about the future. I plan on buying another 5,000,000 shares by the end of the week.
pto issues n0b0dy new patent. method of being biggest dumbasz loser. no prior art came close
http://docketreport.blogspot.de/2015/01/difficult-burden-for-inequitable.html
Greenshift is dead....is over boys. Move on.
Difficult burden? more like impossible....
pto debunked this theory....ruling gets overturned on appeal. judge knows it.... is loading shares
anybody see ICMs latest pr to the industry?
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150120006434/en/GreenShift-Receives-Notices-Allowance-Corn-Oil-Extraction#.VMuhEq10zwp
shouldnt there be some news about the financing soon? hasnt the doomsday deadline come and gone?
He bought into the defendants koolaid. McKinney is most overturned on appeal judge in the country.
PTO has more experience, time, and better understanding of what's going on here.
PTO looked at what McKinney "thinks" and shook their old. Issued 3 new patents.
McKinney is old, appointed by Reagan for God's sake. Should retire.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-12/duke-energy-wins-verdict-reversal-in-epa-lawsuit-over-indiana-power-plants.html
The appeals court also said that U.S. District Judge Larry J. McKinney, who presided over the trial in Indianapolis, improperly admitted expert testimony proffered by the EPA.
http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-court-decisions---sept-4---17-2013/PARAMS/article/32442
Judge Larry McKinney of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana granted summary judgment in favor of SPX on all claims, but the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed.
http://www.woodmclaw.com/attorney/douglas-b-king
After the defendants’ motion for summary judgment was granted, and then reversed on the plaintiff’s appeal to the U.S.C.A. for the 7th Circuit (¶ 23 on the case list of published decisions), the case was remanded for trial to Larry McKinney
http://www.cafcblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Centillion-Data-Sys.-LLC-V.-Qwest-Commc%E2%80%99ns.-Int%E2%80%99l-Inc.1.pdf
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana in Nos. 04-CV-0073 and 04-
CV-2076, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
"Because we reverse the summary judgment of noninfringement
with respect to eBC, we vacate the district
court’s award of costs to Qwest."
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2013/D04-15/C:12-2255:J:Williams:aut:T:fnOp:N:1118572:S:0
Apr 15, 2013 ... 1:10-cv-00765―Judge Larry J. McKinney erred, ... So we reverse the summary judgment
musst not be a war hero either
McKinney's decisions in my view were what he thought to be politically correct, not legally correct. My guess is that in his eyes, it was easier to say no to a small cap company than to piss off several medium cap companies. Obviously the PTO doesn't see it that way and they don't bow down to political pressure. This will all play out in the end in the favor of GERS. Although the On Sale Bar issue is still concerning, I have read the reply brief from Michael Rye and it is very compelling. Unless Cantrell was acting in a rouge state of mind, Ol' Kevy being an attorney would not have let that letter go out. And if he knew about it, it would have had to represent an offer regarding testing.
The infringers are thieves and have not been able to develop any technology on their own. They have profited on lies and stealing...
If the court reads this blog, please do not let these crooks get away with this capper! See through the BS!
"If the court reads this blog, please do not let these crooks get away with this capper!"
Nothing, and I mean nothing, exemplifies the delusional state of mind of many GERSlanders as that statement and plea. No wonder they have been led to financial slaughter by the thousands.
By the way it is c-a-p-e-r. Another statement about the educational level of GERSlanders that has contributed to their demise.
Well said 7:22
There are no hyphens in the word "caper."
There are no hyphens in the word "caper."
no hyphens and no quotation marks in the word caper
Perhaps you were trying to spell crapper?
Just who are these blog trolls that claim to have no vested interest in GERS but appear here day after day and reply to every post? Makes you wonder what they are so nervous about... Either that or they have no life! My guess is both, LOL...
The PTO is in complete disagreement with a judge that has a long history of reversed summary judgment decisions. Interesting...
We should learn more in the next few weeks... Time for McKinney to retire. His decisions have a history of being wrong and his overturn rate is proof of this. Why is he still on the bench? What judge would kick sand in the face of the PTO as often as he does. These patents are valid, enforceable and infringed upon. Maybe he though ol Kevy would just go away. I don't think so!
In the latest stage of a long-running federal appeal, the three-judge appellate panel reversed a decision from U.S. Judge Larry McKinney in the Southern District of Indiana. The 7th Circuit remanded the case to Judge McKinney to determine the competency issue, of which the appellate panel found his examination was inadequate.
In today's ruling, the 7th Circuit was again unpursuaded by Judge McKinney's examination of the competency issue as it relates to expert psychiatric reports received. In one instance, authoring U.S. Judge Richard Posner wrote about being "troubled" by the District judge's evaluation that seems to have given weight to one expert more than another. The accuracy of his decision that Holmes is competent for the proceedings is in question, Judge Posner wrote.
"The implication is profoundly unsatisfactory"
Writing that it reluctantly reverses Judge McKinney's decision, the court reversed and remanded it.
In one instance, authoring U.S. Judge Richard Posner wrote about being "troubled" by the District judge's evaluation that seems to have given weight to one expert more than another.
You forget that the defendants are the ones that filed a Writ of Mandamus with the Appellate Court to have McKinney removed from this trial. They failed and the Appellate Court sided with McKinney on his process and interpretation of the law. You can cite all the issues with other rulings; they may have no bearing here as the Appellate Court has already certified McKinney's actions in this specific litigation.
I didn't forget it. The AC siding with McKinney on the proper venue, not an actual ruling, is nowhere near as relevant as McKinney's long history of reversed rulings. Apples and oranges. The professionals at the PTO live and breath this stuff. The issuance of 3 new patents, despite one mans opinion, has sent a chill down the spine of the defendants. Thank God for the system of checks and balances designed to prevent a single decrepit mans thought process from becoming the final say.
Now on the other hand, if McKinney ruled in favor of GERS I would have said the man is a genius! Seriously though, this will go to appeal and the AC will weigh the recent re-exam and the 3 new patents and reverse this decision. One of the presumptions will be that the PTO knows a lot more about this technology than they do. Their biggest consideration will be the on-sale letter. And from reading Rye's response, it is compelling for GERS.
Post a Comment