Thursday, January 5, 2017

“Avoid unnecessary appellate procedures” ?

In the Court’s October 23, 2014 Order (“the SJ Order”) as clarified by its October 28, 2014 Order, this Court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants on their affirmative defenses and counterclaims of patent invalidity based on anticipation, obviousness, and on-sale bar.

CleanTech offers the prosecution history of U.S. Appl. No. 13/450,997 (the “‘997 Application”), a continuation application of the ‘858 family that was allowed by the same Examiner as the patents-in-suit. Prior to allowing the ‘997 Application, the Examiner was provided a copy of the Court’s October 23, 2014 order invalidating the patents-in-suit, as well as the items of prior art and documents relied upon by the Court in reaching its summary judgment ruling. Also, CleanTech offers to this Court a recent Federal Circuit decision issued on July 11, 2016 (The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc. 827 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2016)). If this Court were to follow that case, it would not have found that the inventions defined in the claims at issue were on sale prior to the critical date.

Motions to amend the judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 allow a party to “avoid unnecessary appellate procedures” by bringing such errors to the district court's attention.

SEE HERE

SkunK

PS Although the case was closed, I see that after a break, documents continued to be posted to the case. More to follow.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

I did the math of the timelines for this appeal and I think we should be seeing something around the middle of January.

After reading all 16 pages, their argument is very compelling... I am sure that ICM and all the other crooks would disagree...

nobody123789 said...

Thank you Skunk.

nobody123789 said...

Jan 5 3:30 Anony -- upon what information do you base your "middle of January" estimate?

nobody123789 said...

"Handwriting on the wall"?

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/14-1469.Opinion.7-7-2016.1.PDF

Anonymous said...

The "hanging chad" in all of this is really the supposed offer letter from Cantrel that supposedly created the offer of sale. Looking at all the facts and the case law, the letter really becomes mute if in fact the (case law seems to substantiate) that this letter did not constitute an offer to sell. Criteria was not met. Judge McKinley may just have another appeal overturn yet another on of his determinations. Again, I think we will hear something shortly. GERS is unfairly being punished for what are industry changing inventions that were patented and in my opinion stolen by the likes of ICM, et Al. Treble damages! ICM indemnifies everyone too... Would we ever get paid?

nobody123789 said...

It is unfortunate that Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 (e) requires them to go back to McKinney instead of directly to the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit does not want to be bothered by obvious errors, but if McKinney finds a way around reversing himself we have gained nothing and lost a lot of time! Speaking of time, everything I read states that a federal judge has no time limit on when he must respond to this motion -- it could be years. If anyone can document differently that would be helpful.

nobody123789 said...

What is KK up to now?
http://thundercrowd.us/
http://thundercrowd.us/about/
“We are the Thunder of Crowdfunding, we make it rain”

Anonymous said...

Hopefully they can petition the court for an expedited ruling. We are running out of time...

Don't ask me why but I think we are going to hear something within two weeks...

nobody123789 said...

The R/S did not take effect today. When the trading symbol changes to GERSD the deed will have been done. This change will be documented in the morning before trading begins on http://www.otcmarkets.com/market-activity/symbol-changes

Anonymous said...

What reverse split?

nobody123789 said...

From the November 28, 2016 DEF 14C filing:
"The purpose of this Information Statement is to notify you that the holder of shares representing a majority of the voting power of GreenShift Corporation (the "Company") has given its written consent to a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company to amend the articles of incorporation so as to effect a reverse split of the Company's common stock in a ratio of 1-for-100. We anticipate that this Information Statement will be mailed on November 29, 2016 to shareholders of record. On or after January 3, 2017, the amendment of the articles of incorporation will be filed with the Delaware Secretary of State and will become effective."

 
Free Blog CounterTamron