Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Pacific Ethanol, Inc. Message Board

  • slashnuts slashnuts Apr 18, 2013 9:02 PM Flag

    Extraction Patent Ruling Favors GreenShift

    Extraction Patent Ruling Favors GreenShift

    "A court ruling has been announced in favor of GreenShift on its ongoing patent battle against several ethanol producers and other entities for infringement of GreenShift’s corn oil extraction processes. Defendants in the litigation argued that GreenShift’s patents are limited to the recovery of at least 95% of the oil present in the concentrated thin stillage feed stream and that there are no infringement occurring because they are recovering less than 95% of the oil. A court ruling has issued a Supplemental Claim Construction Order clarifying the patents do not require recovery of any particular percentage of oil present in the stream. "

    Let's not forget, ICM told the infringers that under a proper interpretation of the patents claims, ICM's systems don't infringe. The judge interpreted them in GERS' favor and against what ICM led the infringers to believe. ICM has fired more than half of their work force since this lawsuit began. They're in way over their heads with the ability to indemnify the entire industry. This is likely the reason VLO has not continued the roll-out of the ICM POS to the rest of their plants. That and the fact it extracts 70% less oil in violation of GERS' patents. That's all that matters here.

    Good Luck To All!$!$!$!$!$!$!$

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Cardinal and ICM appear to rely solely on the hope that the court will invalidate GreenShift’s patents based entirely on information considered and rejected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “PTO”) prior to the issuance of GreenShift’s patents. GreenShift believes that this argument is especially weak and that it must fail. Cardinal and ICM argue that GreenShift’s inventions were obvious and unpatentable. That is simply not the case. ICM previously raised the information that it believed invalidated GreenShift’s invention and failed – the PTO considered and rejected the materials raised by ICM prior to the issuance of GreenShift’s first two patents in October 2009. Any producer that relies upon ICM’s continued claims of invalidity does so at its own peril.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • So far, all court rulings have been ordered in GERS' favor. Injunctions are coming and the courts will shut PEIX's infringing extraction systems down. PEIX is a patent infringing scam.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

      • 1 Reply to slashnuts
      • slashnuts ... we have a CEO to take care of the "patent thing" because we do not want to have anything with the action to do! The "thing" is located at NK, and if you want a dialogue within a legal decision ... write NK

        Personally, I'm "tired" of your incessant writing about nothing ... until the court has spoken, it is nothing ... (get it) until I was tired of your "writings" on the actual development, I had somewhere "sympathy" for the Green Shift & GS CleanTech ... the sympathy is gone because of you! ... now they can for my sake shut the company with subsidiaries, management and patent owners :)

        stock `

    • The court battle is going in GERS' favor, that's why they expanded the lawsuit against PEIX. ICM is losing and trying to appeal the loss.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • Both Markman rulings in favor of GERS and against PEIX's equipment supplier. ICM scammed PEIX into breaking the law and PEIX will either license with GERS or be sued.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • 2nd Markman ruling in GERS' favor. ICM is screwed and PEIX is infringing with ICM's equiment. The court's agree with GERS. that's all that matters.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

      • 1 Reply to slashnuts
      • The 2nd Markman ruling is now public. ICM lost this hearing terribly. PEIX bought infringing equipment from ICM and ICM is already being sued in court and losing.

        GERS will expand the lawsuit this year to include other companies stealing their technology, like PEIX. PEIX is now infringing GERS' patents and an injunction upon summary judgement is likely.

        GERS patented these systems and ICM stole the idea. PEIX is doing business with crooks which makes PEIX crooks, IMO.

        Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • The good judge ruled against ICM, PEIX's equipment supplier. The act of infringement takes place by PEIX, in PEIX's plants and PEIX is responsible for past royalties to GERS.

      It's time PEIX stops stealing technology that isn't theirs.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • On july 16, a motion for summary judgement against PEIX's equipment supplier will be filed. I expect an injunction after that against PEIX if they don't license with the patent holder and true inventor, GERS.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • You are a MORON! Can I watch while you SLASH your wrists when you look in the mirror and finally recognize the fool you have become?

    • Extraction patent ruling in GERS' favor and against PEIX/ICM. PEIX will be added to the list of infringers as they extract a product that's mostly oil from syrup, patented by GERS.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • PEIX is infringing GERS' family of patents. This is against the law, Lawsuit's are coming for PEIX, IMO.
      PEIX extracts a product that's mostly oil from syrup, a clear violation of GERS' patents as PEIX is not licensed.

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

      • 1 Reply to slashnuts
      • Ethanol investments are a risk of their own. Ones that infringe patents are too great of a risk. GERS' doesn't wish to sue PEIX, but will if they have to. The extraction systems were supposed to be running by now. Could it be that after the major ruling against PEIX's infringing systems they there was a delay while negotiating a license with GERS? It's NK choice, license with GERS or be sued and forced to license with GERS. Producers make more money with GERS than without. I'm sorry NK drank ICM's koolaid, but he has to see the writing on the wall after the court's ruling against the current infringers.

        The last thing I heard from PEIX was they didn't think they needed to be licensed with GERS. That was before the major ruling. Let's see if this courts ruling changes their beliefs or if they need to be added to the infringer list.

        Sentiment: Strong Sell

 
PEIX
3.22-0.02(-0.62%)Feb 12 4:00 PMEST