Saturday, March 7, 2015

Agreed

Agreed 1436

Agreed 1440

Sever

Order to Transfer Venue 1441

SkunK

13 comments:

  1. 13/450,997 NOA fee due 3/19/15
    13/185,841 NOA fees due 3/24/15
    11/908,891 NOA fee due 3/26/15

    ReplyDelete
  2. KK will have to cash in tens of million of shares to pay those fees -- standby for more dilution.

    ReplyDelete
  3. http://www.uscourts.gov/FormsAndFees/Fees/CourtOfAppealsMiscellaneousFeeSchedule.aspx

    http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/fee-schedules

    ReplyDelete
  4. • Currently have 50 significant customers
    with expressed interest to trial
    • 20 Customer trials in queue; 7 customers
    with dedicated R&D Programs

    ReplyDelete
  5. Zero BID coming. Mark this post. Then you will not be able sell your shares until the next R/S and you will suffer the cataclysmic fall in PPS immediately after that happens.

    ReplyDelete
  6. you said you present a balanced stance on this company but gleefully tell investors your real agenda, and while the history of R/S is true, please show proof of the zero bid for this company...

    you said you had a bazillion shares for, 'just in case' do you still own those shares? are you buying a bazillion more now, you know, for 'just in case'?

    as a basher you're no better than a pumper, at least with a pumper they sound sad when the price crashes, whereas your vulture stance and exclamations border on the orgasmic.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This thing has been to zero BID several times previously before another R/S. Look it up! These are just facts. The glee you hear is in your own demented head conditioned by your euphoric view that conflicts with the facts I present.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That 4,573,021 sell was not part of a YAGI dilution dump. It was one the relative newbies getting out before we go ZERO BID. Auf Wiedersehen.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The numbers in the 8-K may appear large but they represent only about $120,000. This tells you a great deal about the financial condition of this company; that it has to dilute the common shareholder by 40% to pay this measly amount to its creditors. I think that we are past the point that we should expect continued massive dilution and reverse splits. No, bankruptcy is the logical next step.

    ReplyDelete

  10. GreenShift Receives Notices of Allowance on Three New Corn Oil Extraction Patents



    ALPHARETTA, GA. — GreenShift Corporation (OTCQB:GERS) announced today that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) recently issued Notice of Allowances for the following U.S. Pat. Application Nos.:


    •13/450,997 titled “Methods of Processing Ethanol Byproducts and Related Subsystems” (the “’997 Patent Application”) on December 19, 2014;
    •13/185,841 titled “Method and Systems for Enhancing Oil Recovery from Ethanol Production Byproducts” (the “’841 Patent Application”) on December 24, 2014; and,
    •11/908,891 titled “Methods and Systems for Washing Ethanol Production Byproducts to Improve Oil Recovery” (the “’891 Patent Application”) on December 26, 2014.

    The Notices of Allowances for these applications were issued by the USPTO after a review of a recent Summary Judgment decision and other filings by the defendants in an ongoing infringement action against multiple defendants by GS CleanTech Corporation, a subsidiary of GreenShift. Each of the recently allowed patent applications was examined and considered patentable by a different examiner and after each had considered the Summary Judgment decision.

    The Summary Judgment issued on October 23, 2014 by the District Court in Indiana and ruled in favor of defendants on their motions for summary judgment alleging that the corn oil extraction patents issued to GS CleanTech were invalid, including US Pat. Nos. 7,601,858 and 8,168,037. As previously announced GreenShift intends to appeal the Summary Judgment decision. Under applicable standards, a patent is not invalid until and unless a final judgment of invalidity is rendered after all available appeals have been exhausted.

    “We believe in our intellectual property rights and the system of checks and balances designed to protect those rights, both in the patent office and the courts,” said Kevin Kreisler, GreenShift’s chief executive officer. “We will appeal the Summary Judgment ruling at the appropriate time. In the meantime, we remain focused on growth, innovation and bringing value to our licensees.”


    Coverage of Allowed Claims

    The allowed ‘997 Patent Application is a continuation application of US Pat. No. 7,601,858, and involves the concentration and mechanical processing of thin stillage to recovery at least a portion of the oil from the concentrate. The ‘891 Patent Application and the ‘841 Patent Application are continuation applications of US Pat. No 8,168,037. The allowed claims in the ‘841 Patent Application cover processes directed to evaporating thin stillage to reduce water content, recovering oil with a horizontal centrifugal three phase decanter, evaporating the concentrate to further reduce its moisture content, and mixing the evaporated concentrate with distillers wet grains. The allowed claims in the ‘891 Patent Application include processes directed to washing whole stillage with thin stillage to increase the oil content of the thin stillage, followed by concentration and recovery of oil.

    The Notices of Allowances for these applications were issued by the USPTO after a review of a recent Summary Judgment decision and other filings by the defendants in an ongoing infringement action against multiple defendants by GS CleanTech Corporation, a subsidiary of GreenShift. Each of the recently allowed patent applications was examined and considered patentable by a different examiner and after each had considered the Summary Judgment decision.



    February 28, 2015 at 8:43 AM

    Anonymous Anonymous said...

    “We believe in our intellectual property rights and the system of checks and balances designed to protect those rights, both in the patent office and the courts,” said Kevin Kreisler, GreenShift’s chief executive officer. “We will appeal the Summary Judgment ruling at the appropriate time. In the meantime, we remain focused on growth, innovation and bringing value to our licensees.”

    ReplyDelete
  11. You are either KK or Slashnuts. Either way, it takes a great deal of delusion to be in that mindset.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Each of the recently allowed patent applications was examined and considered patentable by a different examiner and after each had considered the Summary Judgment decision.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 13/450,997 NOA fee due 3/19/15
    13/185,841 NOA fees due 3/24/15
    11/908,891 NOA fee due 3/26/15

    ReplyDelete