InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 25
Posts 5233
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/02/2011

Re: Dutch1 post# 44572

Wednesday, 08/23/2017 6:57:18 AM

Wednesday, August 23, 2017 6:57:18 AM

Post# of 52841
No panic smile

I did better look at this link
I think it al had to do with this old case, but still I now see GERS as Defendant as well as Plaintiff. Maybe someone can explain it? Are there still more cases pending or are these closed?

On October 13, 2009, GS CleanTech filed a legal action in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York captioned GS CleanTech Corporation v. GEA Westfalia Separator, Inc.; and DOES 1-20, alleging infringement of the ‘858 Patent ("New York I Action"). On October 13, 2009, GS CleanTech filed a Motion to Dismiss with the same court relative to a separate complaint filed previously by Westfalia captioned GEA Westfalia Separator, Inc. v. GreenShift Corporation that alleged (1) false advertising in violation of the Lanham Act § 43(a); (2) deceptive trade practices and false advertising in violation of New York General Business Law §§ 349, 350 and 350-a; and (3) common law unfair competition ("New York II Action"). On October 13, 2009, Westfalia filed its First Amended Complaint in the New York II Action to include as a plaintiff, ethanol production company Ace Ethanol, LLC , and to add claims seeking a declaratory judgment of invalidity and non-infringement of the ‘858 Patent. On October 13, 2009, ICM, Inc. filed a complaint in the United States District Court, District of Kansas in the matter captioned ICM, Inc. v. GS CleanTech Corporation and GreenShift Corporation, alleging unfair competition, interference with existing and prospective business and contractual relationships, and deceptive trade practices and also seeking a declaratory judgment of invalidity and non-infringement of the ‘858 Patent.



Source: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269127/000109690614001151/R28.htm