Alto Ingredients Inc (ALTO)

[BottomBounce]

$PEIX The Market is hot @ https://alphastocknews.com/gevo-gevo-stock-rockets-on-1-5-billion-in-contracts/4017/

[whytestocks]

News; $PEIX High Volume Penny Stocks to Watch At The End Of August 2020

What Does High Volume Mean For These Penny Stocks? One of the top things traders look for in penny stocks is volume. You might look for catalysts like news, upcoming events, corporate filings, etc. But the one telltale sign of interest in a stock is volume. It doesn’t matter who you s...

Read the whole news PEIX - High Volume Penny Stocks to Watch At The End Of August 2020

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 08-27-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[whytestocks]

JUST IN: $PEIX Pacific Ethanol Stock Jumped 24% Today: What Investors Need To Know

Shares of  Pacific Ethanol  (NASDAQ: PEIX) rocketed higher when the market opened on Aug. 27, surging more than 24% in the first half hour of trading. At this writing around 12:13 p.m. EDT, shares have cooled off but are still up more than 9%.  This is a reversal for the compan...

In case you are interested PEIX - Pacific Ethanol Stock Jumped 24% Today: What Investors Need To Know

[rwdutch]

G
R
E
E
N

[whytestocks]

News: $PEIX Why Pacific Ethanol Stock Just Keeps Going Up

After dipping a bit on Friday , shares of alcohol-producer Pacific Ethanol (NASDAQ: PEIX) are back on a tear this week, rising first 30% in Monday trading and now another 16.5% today. Through 11:45 a.m. EDT, the stock has gained more than 48% in less than 48 hours of trading! Why are Nasd...

Read the whole news PEIX - Why Pacific Ethanol Stock Just Keeps Going Up

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 08-18-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[eduwhitesox]

Dutch1; need your translation help on ATIS #1134

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 08-12-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 08-11-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[JustBegin]

Wow

[whytestocks]

News: $PEIX Pacific Ethanol Receives Affirmative Nasdaq Compliance Determination

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 10, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (NASDAQ: PEIX) , a leading producer and marketer of low-carbon renewable fuels and high-quality alcohol products in the United States, announced it received a letter from The NASDAQ Stock Market (“NASDAQ...

In case you are interested PEIX - Pacific Ethanol Receives Affirmative Nasdaq Compliance Determination

[whytestocks]

News: $PEIX Pacific Ethanol to Release Second Quarter 2020 Results

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 05, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (NASDAQ: PEIX) , a leading producer and marketer of low-carbon renewable fuels and high-quality alcohol products in the United States, announced it will release its second quarter 2020 financial results after the c...

Find out more PEIX - Pacific Ethanol to Release Second Quarter 2020 Results

[stocksmanjr]

trying to fill Thursday's gap?

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 07-30-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[Houstonian]

[ROCKY LEDGE]

2.27. +29%. 7.3mil.

$PEIX

[Dutch1]

Very nice performance lately. I wonder if it can delay or even avoid the RS?

Any thoughts? It seems like they are meeting the Nasdaq listing requirements again?

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 07-27-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[whytestocks]

News: $PEIX Pacific Ethanol, Inc. Expands High-Quality Alcohol Production Capacity

SACRAMENTO, Calif., July 27, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (NASDAQ: PEIX) , a leading producer and marketer of low-carbon renewable fuels and high-quality alcohol products in the United States, today announced that it is expanding its production capacity of USP grade high ...

In case you are interested PEIX - Pacific Ethanol, Inc. Expands High-Quality Alcohol Production Capacity

[Golden Cross]

50sma crossed the 200sma for a bullish cross Friday

[Earlofsandwich]

good to see PEIX on the march again.....

[Dutch1]

You can say that again

[Earlofsandwich]

looking pretty positive maybe 1.0 soon....go PEIX

[Slashnuts]

Status: Patented Case: Patent 10,655,083 Issued 05-19-2020

05-19-2020 Recordation of Patent Grant Mailed...

https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair

Good Luck To All!$!$

[Slashnuts]

USPTO Rules Against Patent Infringing PEIX.BK...!!!

Defendant PEIX Owes GERS Millions In Delinquent Corn Oil Extraction Royalties.

On February 21, 2020, the USPTO issued a notice of allowance on our twelfth corn oil extraction patent. It did so after taking pains to evaluate the same District Court rulings and underlying evidence that were just reviewed by the Federal Circuit, along with facts that we never had a chance to present to a jury. In allowing this new patent, the USPTO concluded that the information the District Court determined to have been "withheld" from the USPTO was immaterial to patentability, and that our patents-in-suit should have been held valid and enforceable.

The USPTO subsequently disagreed that deception of any kind occurred when, on February 21, 2020, it issued another patent to us after reviewing the very evidence that was allegedly "withheld," along with everything the defendants ever submitted and claimed, as well as the District Court's 2014 and 2016 rulings – all in light of the facts that were never presented to a jury. Significantly, the new patent was allowed by the same examiner that the District Court said was deceived. In other words, the same patent examiner that was allegedly deceived looked at the purported evidence and claims of deception, and disagreed that she had ever been deceived. Thus, in issuing that patent, the examiner concluded that the inventive process was not "ready for patenting" in July 2003, that an invalidating "offer for sale" did not occur in July 2003, and that the "ready for patenting" and "offer for sale" information that the District Court determined to have been "deliberately withheld" from the USPTO was immaterial to patentability. We see that result as nothing short of total vindication, and proof that our patents-in-suit should have been held valid and enforceable.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/greenshift-provides-update-301053426.html

[Slashnuts]

Patent # 10,655,083 Is Scheduled To Be Issued On 05-19-2020...

https://countingdownto.com/?c=2979816

Title of invention:
METHOD OF PROCESSING ETHANOL BYPRODUCTS AND RELATED SUBSYSTEMS

Quote:

"The very Examiner who was allegedly “misled” by Appellants concluded that she was not misled, and that the Letter did not raise an on-sale bar."



Good Luck To All!$!$

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 04-03-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 03-20-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 03-03-2020 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[Slashnuts]

USPTO VS The Court Of Appeals decision...Plumtree

The difference between the USPTO and The Court Of Appeals decision is reason enough to file a Writ. Plumtree, GERS' primary defense wasn't even considered.

The USPTO took Plumtree into consideration and correctly ruled in our favor.

The Court Of Appeals refused to consider Plumtree simply because it wasn't mentioned in The District Court and therefor ineligible for review.

CleanTech contends that the District Court misconstrued
the law by failing to apply Plumtree’s requirement that the
“challenger must prove that the patentee either: (i) ‘made
a commercial offer to perform the patented method[]’[;] or
(ii) ‘in fact performed the patented method for a promise of
future compensation.’” Appellant’s Br. 36. CleanTech,
however, did not make this argument before the District
Court and cited to Plumtree only once in its summary judg-
ment opposition and only for the proposition that the July 2003 Proposal was not invalidating because it “did not unambiguously require use of [CleanTech’s] patented methods[.]” J.A. 26364 (citing Plumtree, 473 F.3d at 1163).
Because we apply the law of the regional circuit as to pro-
cedural matters, see Info-Hold, Inc. v. Muzak LLC, 783 F.3d 1365, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015), here the Seventh Circuit,
we will not decide an issue for the first time on appeal, see
Scheurer v. Fromm Family Foods LLC, 863 F.3d 748, 755
(7th Cir. 2017) (“The well-established rule in th[e Seventh]
Circuit is that a plaintiff waives the right to argue an issue
on appeal if she fails to raise the issue before a lower court.”

File the Writ and get this reversed upon consideration of Plumtree.

Good Luck To All!$!$

[Houstonian]

You can give it a rest now Slash. It's over, the bad guys won.

[Slashnuts]

PEIX.BK USPTO Allows New Patent NOA 02-25-20!

You guy's have a lot of catching up to do. I've been closely following this patent's prosecution history for 5 years. Checking the Public PAIR website 1000's of times for updates on this crucial patent. Often reading the documents the day they were released. The USPTO's decision is of extreme significance. You must go to the Public PAIR website to view the details.

*Despite the defendants rhetoric, the USPTO found the offer letter was for experimental purposes and not an offer to sell.

*By issuing this new patent yesterday, the USPTO rejects the notion it was deceived.

*The invention was not reduced to practice and all claims have been allowed.

*The defendants entire case relies on the false claim the invention was reduced to practice and the letter was an offer to sell.

*Defendants claimed that had the USPTO seen the letter, the patents would've never issued.


Go to the USPTO website...

https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair

Select "Publication Number"

Enter # 20150191675

(Note: You may need to try this a few times. The website is finicky. If it doesn't work the first time, you must be sure to re-select "publication number" before entering the number again.)

Select "Image File Wrapper"

You will see the prosecution history of this patent.
The last filing is the Notice of Allowance 02-25-2020.

Details on each filing can be viewed by clicking on the box to the far right. A check mark will appear. Multiple box's can be check marked at once to view multiple filings at once. From there, click on the blue "PDF" button above the boxes.

Begin with the document titled "Final Rejection" dated 06-14-18. Startling comments from the examiner. That it was an offer to sell. That the letter was hidden in a mountain of paperwork. The same things the defendants claimed.

Next read "applicant Argument" 12-14-18. Plum tree is mentioned.

From there read "final rejection" 04-17-19.

An "Applicant Initiated Interview" similar to an appeal, transpired on 07-29-19. Details of the interview emerged in the following documents.

These are my favorite documents. The response from GERS is very powerful. "Applicants Argument" 10-17-19 and 10-03-19. Very similar documents.

Good Luck To All!$!$

[Slashnuts]

USPTO Rules Against Patent Infringing PEIX.BK...

GERS get's new oil extraction patent (application 20150191675). NOA issued today!

Defendant's case crumbles...PEIX is toast...

[Clutch29]

dont get caught in this shitbox of a stock. The Sac plant is closing

[Slashnuts]

The 2003 Samples Cooled In Minutes, Took Hours To Process

The reason the centrifuge continuously plugged during the 2003 testing is because they didn't practice the methods.

Defendant's misled The Court to believe the syrup in the 2003 test was "170 degree's". It may have been 170 when they collected it, but not by the time they tested it. The patents specify a range of 150-212 (ideally 180). They collected 4, 2 quart pitchers of syrup and processed them over a period of 4-6 hours, without heating the syrup.

I did a quick experiment, here's what I found: I heated 100% water to 170 degrees and poured it into a 2 quart pitcher. The temperature instantly dropped 7 degrees. Within 9 minutes, the water was 149.9, below the required temperature to practice the patent.

I repeated the same experiment with 100% oil. The temperature was below 150 degrees within 4 minutes.

Syrup is a mixture of oil, water and solids. The syrup pulled from Agri-Energy's syrup tank during the 2003 test would've cooled below 150 within roughly 6 minutes, let alone 6 hours.

Think about that. By the time they collected the samples, walked to the test centrifuge and started processing it, the samples were below the required temperature to practice the method. "A cold vinaigrette".

The centrifuge didn't process the syrup in a continuous fashion because it repeatedly clogged and had to be disassembled. Were not talking about CIP here.

The inventors knew something in the evaporation process allowed for oil recovery but it wasn't reduced to practice. The methods weren't established until after the 2004 test.

[Slashnuts]

Isn't It Ironic?

The patent claims require syrup flowing to the centrifuge and separation of oil to operate in a continuous fashion.

The District Court found certain defendant processes are not continuous because syrup flow to the centrifuge is sometimes interrupted during solid discharge cycles.

Yet during the 2003 bench test when cooled pitchers of syrup were intermittently poured into the gyro over a period of hours, it repeatedly clogged and was disassembled for cleaning.

This was somehow a reduction to practice? Sounds like a double standard.

Was more than 50% of the oil removed from the pitchers of syrup? It's doubtful since the test took hours, the syrup was allowed to cool and the gyro repeatedly clogged. Was the resulting de-oiled syrup returned to the process for drying as required?

After the test, something in the evaporation process allowed for oil to be extracted. Was it the reduction of water from evaporation? If so, what % range of moisture should they claim in a patent? Was it heat from evaporation? If so, what temperature should they claim in the patent? Was a heat exchanger needed? Since the centrifuge repeatedly clogged, would it even work in a continuous fashion or only in batches? Did plugging of the centrifuge mean higher or lower heat / higher or lower moisture was needed?

There's ample evidence this wasn't reduced to practice. In fact, Barlage stated after the test that more in-plant testing was needed to determine the best methods. So how was it ready for patenting if they hadn't determined the methods/parameters to patent?

They were even talking about using two centrifuges, one for solids and another for oil. Just more evidence they didn't know if it would work for it's intended purpose.

The only way to determine what to patent ie; temperature, moisture, ph, batch/continuous etc was to test it. Testing under actual conditions and proving it would work for it's intended purpose without plugging the centrifuge while dealing with high volumes of syrup (35 GPM). Not four 2 quart pitchers over a period of 4-6 hours.

If the inventors knew it worked for it's intended purpose and it was reduced to practice in 2003, why didn't they try and make sells for a year? Weren't they supposedly trying to "exploit" sales? If the inventors knew the 2003 offer to test could be seen as an invalidating sale and they were trying to "deceive" the patent office by hiding the offer, it makes no sense for them to not file in early 2004.

Plumtree requires every method claim to be disclosed. This information wasn't in the offer to test letter since they hadn't determined the method claims and hadn't proved it would work.

Keep Up The Fight, We Are In The Right!

Good Luck To All!$!$

[Chicago-Paul]

It just tells us that The Retail Investors are not into PEIX yet.

Only Retail Investors use these Boards.

But the Big Institutions are the ones that actually MOVE the Stock Price.

So I kinda like it that this board is dead.

China needs Ethanol.

It is an Election Year and Trump needs to make sure the Iowa Corn Farmers are happy.

And we might go to war with Iran.

So I can see why PEIX has gained more than 50% in just a few weeks.

If China starts buying US Ethanol Tariff-Free, that could be the catalyst that US Ethanol Stocks have been waiting for.

[Dutch1]

Hope it will continue to do so, until they hit the $1 mark.

[ballot123]

PEIX is gaining in large percentages , yet this board is dead. Tells us something .

[ClayTrader]

* * $PEIX Video Chart 12-17-2019 * *

Link to Video - click here to watch the technical chart video

[Dutch1]

RS, and hoping for a real rebound of ethanol. But I don’t see this happening in this political climate.
So probably moving down until after the next elections.

[ballot123]

I'd like to see PEIX survive, but it's a really tough slog at present. Anyone have a clear, sober view of where we go from here ? Thanks.

[Dutch1]

Yep good old times ??

[ballot123]

You're talking about $23 plus at its peak. That was a great time.

[Dutch1]

COL ... like FCOL (For Crying Out Loud) but this time I’m Crying out Loud for not selling my shares back then

[rayank]

https://investorshub.advfn.com/Pre-Market-Alerts-PMA-37302/
Sorry I am not familiar with COL?

[Dutch1]

Yeah me too... just sorry I never sold COL LOL

[rayank]

Yeah many years ago I made good money on PEIX. LOL

[Dutch1]

Pacific Ethanol EPS misses by $0.41, misses on revenue

Usually that means we move up LOL