Status Conference on Settlement
Settlement Conference Vacated
Telephone Conference Set for Tuesday
Unseal
Unseal some Medical
Unseal some Docs
Unseal some more Docs
Order Unsealing GERS Docs
Adkins
GERS on Adkins
Adkins on GERS
Letter to Judge about Adkins
SkunK
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
GERS vacated common shareholder' fiduciary responsibility.
New patent to issue 06/02/2015 patent # 9044702
New patent issued, patent # 9,012,668
New application filed 14/661,369
New patent issued 05/19/2015 Patent # 9034954
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.
Has the feel that they have capitulated. KK on to another gambit.
History of Judge Larry J. McKinney's misjudgments and mistakes which led to countless summary judgment reversals.
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
McKinney history of reversals. History repeats itself.
OK Kevin, time to come out from behind the curtain. Your curtain is now gossamer and transparent.
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.
•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.
New patent issued, patent # 9,012,668
New patent issued Patent # 9034954
New patent to issue 06/02/2015 patent # 9044702
New application filed 14/661,369
For the idiots that keep posting old notices of patents and old information of the judges. I guess you have no other life outside being GERS groupies. I just wonder which of the few left employees at GERS that you are sucking off - your information from.
New patent issued, patent # 9,012,668
New patent issued Patent # 9034954
New patent to issue 06/02/2015 patent # 9044702
New application filed 14/661,369
All of us attending the FEW that just ended, all of us had to raised a eyebrow just a bit when all through out the shows official guide book "Greenshift" as spelled as "GREENSHIT". The company did not have a booth this year and DW was spotted but kept a low profile. I understand that Greenshift was very upset with the shows producer and name screw up and requested a official retraction from them....maybe it will come next year.
Just received a notice for a 1 to 100 reverse split. Not surprised. Based on all the patent , I thought they had a chance... Oh well another failed attempt.
I'm not surprised about the trade show. When you don't pay your bills, screw your vendors, screw the industry in general as well as your investors, that's what your name becomes. SHIT. I call it poetic justice.
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.
History of Judge Larry J. McKinney's misjudgments and mistakes which led to countless summary judgment reversals.
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
Blaa blaa blaa... Reverse split #6 set for 6/22. GERS is a text book toxic financing investor loss share printing machine. Over $125 MILLION DOLLARS sapped so far. A lot more to go if you know how to read a 10K. YAGI is in complete control.
Idiot with the patent and McKinney postings get a life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are a loser idiot!
Post a Comment