Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
MJ Canadian companies can sell cbd products in the USA and be based in the USA and be listed on a major exchange, but a CBD company based in the USA not selling MJ cannot at this time uplist on the same exchange. Makes no sense at all.
United States
FDA regulations still apply: hemp CBD is legal to sell as a cosmetics ingredient, but despite a common misconception, because it is an active ingredient in an FDA-approved drug, cannot be sold under federal law as an ingredient in food, dietary supplements, or animal food.
According to this recent article, the reason why CVSI has not been uplisted to the Nasdaq is what some have made clear on this forum. What is the reason for any other assumption?imo Wolf
Why Canadian companies can list on Nasdaq and NYSE and not US CBD companies. This will be a administrative decision by the exchanges. Imo Wolf
“The companies can list on the U.S. platforms because they don't violate federal law in their own country.”
https://www.investors.com/news/marijuana-stocks-fire-up-investors-great-canada-cannabis-companies-invasion/
CVS pulling some of Curaleaf cbd products from shelves. CVSI products are still on shelves. Wolf
https://www.investors.com/news/marijuana-stocks-curaleaf-stock-fall-fda-warning/
Here is another company trying to get a trademark for New Harvest. They filed on June 7,2019. I believe they will be rejected as well. If CVSI decides to add cbd in food items this will be one reason to protect their trademark. Both are including same classes for use. Since we applied first, we should be awarded the registered Trademark ® . Wolf
Mark: NEW HARVEST FOODS
Trademark image
US Serial Number: 88459028 Application Filing Date: Jun. 04, 2019
Filed as TEAS RF: Yes Currently TEAS RF: Yes
Register: Principal
Mark Type: Trademark, Service Mark
TM5 Common Status Descriptor: TM5 Common Status image
LIVE/APPLICATION/Awaiting Examination
The trademark application has been accepted by the Office (has met the minimum filing requirements) and has not yet been assigned to an examiner.
Status: New application will be assigned to an examining attorney approximately 3 months after filing date.
Status Date: Jun. 18, 2019
Mark Information
Goods and Services
Basis Information (Case Level)
Current Owner(s) Information
Attorney/Correspondence Information
Prosecution History
TM Staff and Location Information
Assignment Abstract Of Title Information - Click to Load
Proceedings - Click to Load
https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=88459028&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch
Things that make you go hmmmmmm Gold news for CVSI. Curaleaf has to pull their products off the shelves of CVS according to Hmmmmmmm you understand. Time to glue new labels on the non glueten free cbd. Wolf
What did the blonde say when she saw the YMCA sign??
LOOK!!! They spelled MACY's wrong!!!
Did someone say you can’t add hemp to food? Non sense. The proof is in the cereal you understand. Wolf ahooooooo
Re: Wolf-man Jack Post # of 52762
This is what I found positive for CVSI. CVSI will rebound once the weaks sell off and those that see an opportunity will add to their positions or Curaleaf sellers will come aboard, imo
Here is what was included in the letter and why The FDA has hinted to GRAS. Also CVS will most likely take Curaleaf products off their shelves, and this is too a positive for CVSI products located in those stores. Imo Wolf
Your “CBD Lotion,” “CBD Pain-Relief Patch,” “CBD Tincture,” and “CBD Disposable Vape Pen” products
are not generally recognized as safe and effective
for the above referenced uses and, therefore, the products are “new drugs” under section 201(p) of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 321(p). New drugs may not be legally introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce without prior approval from the FDA, as described in sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 331(d) and 355(a). FDA approves a new drug on the basis of scientific data and information demonstrating that the drug is safe and effective.
From the Curleaf warning letter...
“products are not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced uses and, therefore, the products are “new drugs” under section 201(p) of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 321(p). New drugs may not be legally introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce without prior approval from the FDA, as described in sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 331(d) and 355(a). FDA approves a new drug on the basis of scientific data and information demonstrating that the
Kentucky The Curaleaf news is the reason for the down turn. It should rebound today. Imo Wolf
This is what I found positive for CVSI. CVSI will rebound once the weaks sell off and those that see an opportunity will add to their positions or Curaleaf sellers will come aboard, imo
Here is what was included in the letter and why The FDA has hinted to GRAS. Also CVS will most likely take Curaleaf products off their shelves, and this is too a positive for CVSI products located in those stores. Imo Wolf
Your “CBD Lotion,” “CBD Pain-Relief Patch,” “CBD Tincture,” and “CBD Disposable Vape Pen” products
are not generally recognized as safe and effective
for the above referenced uses and, therefore, the products are “new drugs” under section 201(p) of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 321(p). New drugs may not be legally introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce without prior approval from the FDA, as described in sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 331(d) and 355(a). FDA approves a new drug on the basis of scientific data and information demonstrating that the drug is safe and effective.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CVS Distribution of CBD Products Sends Curaleaf Shares Soaring
By Craig Giammona
March 20, 2019, 5:33 PM EDT
Updated on March 21, 2019, 9:41 AM EDT
Curaleaf announced the agreement during an earnings conference call on Wednesday. The company’s CBD products will be available in about 800 stores to start, Curaleaf said on the call, and hopes to expand to more.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-20/cvs-joins-cannabis-derived-wellness-trend-selling-cbd-products
Wolf-man Jacks CVSI holding closes at 4.09 down 3 cents. Whereas Montana Jacks CWBHF holding close at 15.25 down 27 cents.
CVSI is again the winner you understand. CVSI is higher from its April’s 3 month high than CWBHF April 3, high. Sadly the itsy bitsy spider is still crawling behind CVSI in their comeback. Below is from Friday. We’ll let MJ figure out the math since his 3 month chart has embarrassed the lad. Ahooooooo Wolf
Wolf-man jack Friday, 07/19/19 03:22:10 PM
Re: sk8er post# 52649 0
Post # of 52741
The Bottom Line. The Wolf doesn’t use charts to deceive the world you understand. The Wolf uses Numbers to perceive the real world. Here is all you need to Know And use to defunct the souls of nonsense. ‘People Get Ready’ for What the Heck Beck. Ahoooo Wolf
Since April 2019 CVSI went from $6.59 to $3.92 Decline of 40.5 %
Since April 2019 CWBHF went from $25.25 to $11.00 Decline of 56.5 %
Today July 19. CVSI $4.14. Down 37.5 percent down since April
Today July 19. CVBHF $15.80 Down 37.5 percent down since April
Within 15 minutes of posting 3:35 pm est
CVSI still $4.14 and CWBHF crawling down the web like a spider to $15.55. The winner CVSI you understand. Ahooooooo
Saw the movie but couldn’t remember. Nothing to ride home to mother about you understand. There was two instances today with a volume of over 200,000 and 50,000, Wolfie
The premise is simple: A clean-cut looking young man (Timothy Bottoms) is planting bombs on amusement park rides, the results of which are displayed gruesomely in the opening sequence as he detonates one on the track of a rollercoaster, causing it to fly off the rails into the park below. Harry Calder (George Segal), a safety inspector responsible for checking that particular coaster, feels a personal stake in determining the cause of the crash. A second accident leads him to discover that the bomber has threatened to unleash further mayhem unless he’s paid a million dollars by the owners of several amusement parks. Calder warns them to take the threat seriously, an opinion that earns him the bomber’s attention and forces him into an uneasy alliance with prickly federal agent Hoyt (Richard Widmark) to trap the suspect.
Like a roller coaster ride my brother. After reading your post, it reminded me of the Ocean View Amusement Park roller coaster. Here is a video from my friend Mike Arlo who started working at WNOR FM 99 and still working at their sister station. I remember his first tour of our carousel studio in 1974. He is still hanging in there. We had a small studio (WNOR AM) underneath that roller coast, broadcasting live on occasions. Wolf
LA Chargers Is this what you are looking for? Another 52,130 of volume at 3:30 pm Wolf
https://www.newsweek.com/archive
There was an aggregate volume of 207,490 shares at 11:50 am. Did anyone else catch this? That is definitely not under the radar or incognito you understand. Wolf
https://ktrh.iheart.com/featured/michael-berry/content/2018-04-20-daves-not-here/
Nice rhyme. Someone posted they were worried about saturation of the cbd market and how the growth will slow down. No worries in CVSIland you understand. The saturation will be in the amount of hemp being harvested. Raw materials costs will fall down to the ground. Imo Wolf
Here is a rhyme for you...Kentucky Hemp Lover searching for his Lucky four leaf Hemp Clover in his bowl of Lucky Charms cereal you understand.
Have you noticed the trend lately. MJ’s leaning towards the US hemp market stock gaining more interest while the other Johnny come lately’s are consolidating and going lower. Here is another trend to keep in mind. Less monies going into CVSI but the amount of shares is bypassing the average daily volume of CWBHF and others. There is smart money going into CVSI but they appear to be maneuvering under the radar and incognito you understand. Imo E.F. Wolf
Who needs to tie up assets in growing hemp when the US is going to need Daniel Boone to clear another path to the West you understand. Ahooooooo Wolf
https://www.wral.com/wolfman-jack-spent-last-years-of-his-life-in-nc/18357594/
Sweet Peaches, Hemp, and Sweet Southern Belles. What a Sweet and Lovely Pear you understand. Georgia on and in the Wolf’s mind. Ahooooooo Wolf
The Wolf made a biggly mistake. While the Wolf was huffing and puffing, you know how smoke gets in your eyes and it’s cloudy outside, the Wolf got dazed and confused. Farmers Trust is an investment company from OhiO. Do you think they will add to their New Harvest now that the hemp bill in oHIo is about to be signed by the Governor? Only the Wolf’s hairdresser nose for sure you understand. Go ask Alice. Ahooooooo Wolfie and his curling iron.
And The Beat Goes On. Another DD article from Anonymous from the Y. Between A and Brevin, they should get the GRAMmy award you understand. Oh My my Have Mercy Ahooooooo Wolf
Thanks and kudos to Anonymous from the Y. Wolf
Shout out to Congressman Comer of Kentucky. HIGH IQ you bet they do Just Ask Mike you understand.
ahooooooo
POLITICS Kentucky GOP Congressman Comer Touts ‘High Hemp IQ’ Of His Constituents
The Wolf just went back to little genies1234 post on the coming to take you away institutionalized owners you understand. The Wolf is holding 21,500 shares. That is more than the 21,145 shares of crop that The Farmers Trust is harvesting. They sure know how to take the letter P out of bumper crop you understand. Bump bump bump bum bum bum bum. Bummer ):. Ahooooooo Wolf
That was also my first, my last, and my everything impresssion as well you understand. They purchased their labels and glued them on their purchased bottles of product. One thing is for certain, they aren’t Glueten free you understand. Just Hold on to those all those little rascals you are holding. Wolfie
You have more shares than Farmers Trusr. That shows you how much trust they have in the Farmers you understand. They’ve seen a few things alright huh. Bum bum bum bum bum bum
Things that make you go hmmmmm . The Wolf enjoyed waking up to your real money presentation you understand. Only wish New Harvest was mentioned in the article, it doesn’t matter anyhoo. This little baby is so undervalued, that when the big boys on the sidelines decide to jump in, they will be getting more shares for their bucks. This will dry up a lot of the float faster. Good find and good day chap. Imo Wolf
Thanks again to Brevin from the Y
“CVSI also added 2 Nature's Food Patch Stores in Florida and the Georgetown Market in Indianapolis.”
https://pluscbdoil.com/stores/natures-food-patch-clearwater/
https://www.naturesfoodpatch.com/
https://pluscbdoil.com/stores/georgetown-market-3/
https://georgetownmarket.com/
Owner Name Date Shares Held Change (Shares) Change (%) Value (in 1,000s)
FNY INVESTMENT ADVISERS, LLC 03/31/2019 91,356 91,356 New 376
FARMERS TRUST CO 06/30/2019 21,145 0 0.00 87
ESSEX INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT CO LLC 03/31/2019 4,642 4,642 New 19
SONORA INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC 06/30/2019 1,000 1,000 New 4
ALPHA OMEGA WEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC 03/31/2019 105 0 0.00
HILTON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC 03/31/2019 0 (75,000) Sold Out
Institutional Holdings information for this company is filed by major institutions on form 13-F with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
3 New Amigos
Royce & Associates LP 0.30% 300,000 1,219,500 +50,000 +20.00%
Uno
Lord, Abbett & Co. LLC 0.23% 221,996 $902,414 +221,996 --
Dos
LSV Asset Management 0.19% 186,494 $758,098 +186,494 --
Tres
FNY Capital Management LP 0.09% 91,356 $371,362 +91,356 --
Got it now, Mikki is a horse and not a mouse and shambala who came in second is not a Three bow wow night butt another horse you understand. Thank you for the clarification M I k k I h o r s e.
Hey Mikki your so fine. Hey Mikki. My apologies but the Wolf refuses to play Toni Basil song Micky. Too childish you understand. W o l f I e ahooooooo
https://mugglehead.com/over-70-of-canadians-want-to-try-cbd-infused-drinks-bevcanna-study/
Kentucky Wedgies. You understand. ahooooooo Wolfie
CV Sciences sponsors UK Student for Hemp Research As a participant in the Kentucky Department of Agriculture’s Industrial hemp Pilot Research Program, UK’s Department of Plant and Soil Sciences is paving the way to a brighter future for hemp in Kentucky. In a PBS Newshour piece from late 2015, David Williams–a professor in the department …
https://pluscbdoil.com/category/kentucky/
PlusCBD™ Oil Full Spectrum Hemp Extracts: What’s The Difference?
Posted in: Plus CBD oil
July 16, 2019
PlusCBD™ Oil offers three different product lines that are all targeted to support different needs within ou.
https://pluscbdoil.com/blog-list/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Wedge Community Co-op or The Wedge is a food cooperative located in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Located at 2105 Lyndale Avenue South, the Wedge derives its name from the popular nickname for the Lowry Hill East neighborhood, called "The Wedge" due to its shape. The Wedge is a member of the NCBA and the NCGA.
https://tccp.coop/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_Community_Co-op
Search Results
Plus CBD Oil › stores › wedge-co-op
Web results
Wedge Co-op - PlusCBD™ Oil
Wedge Co-op. 55405 Minnesota 2105 Lydale Ave. S Minneapolis Minneapolis Minnesota 55405. United States ...
https://pluscbdoil.com/stores/wedge-co-op/
Thank you Brevin from the Y. Wolf
“CVSI just added some new stores the Wedge co-op (3 stores in Minnesota) and the Organic Food Depot (2 stores in Virginia).“
Organic Food Depot Grocery
Virginia Beach, VA
Opens soon · 10AM
CALL
DIRECTIONS
Organic Food Depot
Norfolk, VA
Opens soon · 10AM
https://www.organicfooddepot.com/
Plus CBD Oil › stores › organic-foo...
Organic Food Depot (Virginia Beach) - PlusCBD™ Oil
Organic Food Depot (Virginia Beach). 23462 Virginia 4301 Commuter Drive # 105 Virginia Beach United States US
https://pluscbdoil.com/stores/organic-food-depot-virginia-beach/
Continued FDA Gras Hearings
In an article published on June 20, 2019, regulatory news provider Chemical Watch reported on an update in the ongoing court case regarding the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) voluntary notification program for food additives that are generally recognized as safe (GRAS). The FDA is reported to have defended its program in a June 17th cross-motion for summary judgement arguing that the plaintiffs have “not identified any aspect of the rule that is arbitrary and capricious or not authorized by law.”
The non-governmental organizations the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and Center for Food Safety (CFS) have argued that the FDA’s process lets industry self-regulate its food contact substances (FPF reported), however the FDA has called this an “erroneous premise” and said that it is “simply not so.” The agency urged the court to judge in its favor and commented that “the GRAS rule should be upheld as a reasonable agency interpretation of a broad congressional delegation of authority.” As the plaintiffs, EDF and CFS now have until August 23, 2019 to respond to the FDA’s position.
Read More
Kelly Franklin (June 20, 2019). “US FDA contests Gras rule should be upheld.”
https://www.foodpackagingforum.org/news/fda-defends-gras-rule
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/generally-recognized-as-safe_b_4097431
Overhauling the GRAS Process: What Are Realistic Goals?
Whether the GRAS process needs to be overhauled is a major question, not a minor one, as it drives to the issue of how much regulation we want in our country and whether we trust companies to have consumer safety top-of-mind as they develop new products and ingredients.
ByAnnette Maggi, MS, RDN, LD, FA
In 1958, Congress passed a law requiring companies that developed a new food additive to prove it was safe for human consumption before it could be introduced into the marketplace. Some foods -- think vinegar, oil, salt, sugar -- had been in the food supply and consumed by humans for so long that they were assumed to be safe. These products were coined "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS, as it's frequently referred to today.
Fast forward more than 50 years, where the process for GRAS status is being hotly debated. Technology has led to advances in food development, and we now exist in a global food economy with ingredients sourced from around the world. Grocery stores carry 40,000 food items with flavor profiles, textures, and nutritional properties never imagined in 1958. The time is ripe for an assessment of the effectiveness of the GRAS process.
Background
The Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) regulates food additives, which are required to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before used in products and sold to consumers. However, some ingredients aren't formally approved as food additives and are considered GRAS if qualified experts indicate there is adequate science to show the ingredient is safe for human consumption under conditions of its intended use. As a part of the GRAS process, the foods the ingredient will be used in, projections of the total consumption of the ingredient by an individual and safety of the ingredient are all considered. Estimates suggest 43 percent of the 10,000 additives used in the food supply are considered GRAS. Colors are excluded from the GRAS process and are always considered food additives. In 1997, the FDA proposed but never finalized a rule that food companies could, at their own discretion, notify the regulatory agency when a new additive was GRAS. In practice, nearly all the major companies voluntarily submit their GRAS analysis and data to the FDA. The agency follows-up with a "letter of non-objection," indicating they agree with the GRAS report, or rejects the report.
The GRAS process gets interesting as it relates to who leads the process, defines the expert panel, and finalizes a decision that an ingredient is generally recognized as safe for human consumption. All this is done by the company that manufacturers said ingredient. An article in the August 2013 issue of JAMA Internal Medicine sites a review of 451 GRAS applications (based on criteria established by an Institute of Medicine committee in 2009) submitted to the FDA between 1997 and 2012. Of these, 22 percent were written by an employee of the company that makes and sells the food ingredient, and 13 percent by a consultant hired by the additive company. More than 60 percent of the decisions made on the GRAS status of a food ingredient were by expert panels hired by the additive company or a consulting company working for the additive company. This GRAS review was completed as a part of a Food Additives Project, which is run by the Pew Charitable Trusts, a public policy organization. One goal of this project is to analyze the GRAS process, assessing if it is thorough enough and ensures consumer protection.
Discussion
As with many topics about our food supply (think GMO and fortification), there are multiple points of view embedded in debate on the GRAS process, including:
• Companies vs. the FDA: Who Decides? The role of the FDA is to ensure consumer protection. Some believe the only way to accomplish this is for the FDA to be the study coordinator, scientific reviewer and decision-maker on all issues related to food. U.S. processes in food -- think HACCP, food labeling -- establish a process where the FDA defines the rules and companies are bound to comply with them. While this isn't a perfect system (one doesn't exist anywhere in the world), it is highly effective. If U.S. consumers want this to change, we need to be prepared to pay the price. The FDA is not staffed nor funded to conduct this level of work on food. A colleague recently suggested an option for establishment of a new division of the FDA that owns the GRAS process. Food companies would then pay to have new ingredients reviewed and approved as GRAS.
Food Companies: Friend or Foe? A major criticism of the GRAS process is that food companies, through staff or payment to experts, are driving the final decision of ingredient safety. Because money is exchanged, the assumption is that bias exists in this process. It suggests all these employees and experts are driven by money and not by their own professional integrity. This argument is inherently flawed for a variety of reasons. First, there are a limited number of experts who have enough knowledge of new ingredients (think stevia) and areas of food science, nutrition, and toxicology to review the science. Whether the FDA or the company hires them, there are select few experts who can address any given area. Second, companies want to develop and sell ingredients that are safe for human consumption and solve a problem in consumers' lives. The risk to them of an ingredient not being safe is significant, and one misstep could destroy their brand and their company. They're taking the greatest risk in determining GRAS status of ingredients. Finally, rarely addressed is the number of potential new ingredients which are explored and researched, but never go to market because they aren't safe for human consumption. Companies spend millions of dollars on exploratory research and development which doesn't result in a finished, saleable product.
• New Uses of GRAS Ingredients. Earlier this year, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) submitted a citizens' petition to the FDA recommending the GRAS status of sugar be updated to establish safe levels of its use in food. Caffeine is another example of a food component that has had GRAS status for many years but is now being scrutinized. As it's added to products like energy drinks, alcohol and gum, concern is being raised about the effects a combination of caffeine with amino acids or alcohol might have in the human body. Also, adults and kids alike are consuming higher levels of caffeine on a daily basis, as more food categories contain this stimulant. It's fair to assume that with new uses, GRAS status of ingredients needs to be reassessed.
Conclusion
Whether the GRAS process needs to be overhauled is a major question, not a minor one, as it drives to the issue of how much regulation we want in our country and whether we trust companies to have consumer safety top-of-mind as they develop new products and ingredients. But it's also a question of priority. We have major economic issues in our country, ranging from debt ceilings to health care. Heart disease and obesity are crippling our economy, but we don't legislate saturated and trans fat consumption or food portions at a level equivalent to their negative impact on health. The economic and social benefits of lowering obesity and heart disease rates are much greater in scale and scope than an overhaul of the GRAS process. When all is said and done, what macro problems would an overhaul of the GRAS process really solve?
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/generally-recognized-as-safe_b_4097431
How soon is soon? August 23? October 31? Imo Ahooooooo Wolf
US FDA contests Gras rule should be upheld
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has defended its Generally Recognized as Safe (Gras) voluntary notification programme for food additives, saying it represents a reasonable interpretation of its statutory responsibilities and should be upheld.
The FDA’s position was set out in a 17 June cross-motion for summary judgement with respect to ongoing litigation over the agency’s ‘Gras rule’.
Under this scheme, food additives are permitted to be used without pre-market approval or notification to the agency, provided they meet the same safety standards of other approved substances.
In March, the plaintiffs in the case – the Environmental Defense Fund and the Center for Food Safety – argued that the process effectively permits industry to self-regulate its food contact substances. And it requested that the court vacate the rule and require the agency to develop new regulations compliant with the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (FFDCA).
But in its response, the FDA said that the plaintiffs had "not identified any aspect of the rule that is arbitrary and capricious or not authorised by law".
Their arguments, it said, rely on the "erroneous premise" that the FDA has given manufacturers the ability to make conclusive determinations of Gras status. This, it said, "is simply not so".
"The Gras rule operates the way many important government requirements do: the government sets mandatory standards for private conduct, and parties are expected to meet those standards, risking serious sanctions if they fail to do so," it said.
The agency also dismissed as lacking merit the argument that the rule’s criteria do not constrain manufacturers’ Gras determinations and allow substances to come to market based on "hidden" information.
"The Gras rule should be upheld as a reasonable agency interpretation of a broad congressional delegation of authority," it concluded. And it pressed the court therefore to judge in its favour on all claims.
The lawsuit, Center for Food Safety et al v Price et al, is being heard in the US district court for the southern district of New York. Plaintiff responses are due by 23 August.
https://chemicalwatch.com/78921/us-fda-contests-gras-rule-should-be-upheld
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/eas-assists-food-and-hemp-firms-with-fda-gras-submissions-300862775.html
Wolf prediction. Soon the FDA is going to Weed out the bad actors, starting with all these internet companies such as New Harvest Pharms in my opinion. Gras could be the catalyst to help make this happen. How many of those fly by nightersvare going to be able to continue or enter the market. Why would someone play down the gras requirement on this forum if it wasn’t a valuable procurement. August to late October seems to me to be the window of time for the FDA to come up with a solution to regulate the market. Possibly the market CVSI is in. I think the Food & Beverage with infusions will take longer. Got this article from the Y. ‘‘This is my opinion so take it with a grain of salt and a hit of your favorite wacky weed you understand, Wolf
A coalition of 37 state attorneys general urge FDA to cooperate with states on CBD regulation
In public comment submitted to FDA on July 16, 2019, a coalition of 37 state attorneys general urged FDA to cooperate with the states in protecting consumers from false advertising on cannabis-derived products such as CBD, and the potential hazards of consuming such products in certain populations.
“We write to express our hope that the FDA continues to explore manufacturing, testing, and marketing best practices so that consumers are not at risk of misleading advertising or harm to their health from dangerous additives or undisclosed risks of use,” writes the coalition. “A crucial element of FDA regulation and oversight should be an on-going assessment of the potential risks or benefits of these products, particularly for specific populations such as pregnant women, adolescents and children, and the elderly. How these products interact with other dietary or pharmaceutical products should be included in this assessment. It is also important that companies not mislead consumers. Scientific and medical data from the FDA would assist in meaningful enforcement of advertising laws and regulations by the states.”
http://www.nutritionaloutlook.com/regulatory/coalition-37-state-attorneys-general-urge-fda-cooperate-states-cbd-regulation
AP check my post again.I added an alternative mower. I just found this article about my cousin who was principal of the School. My cousin George later became. A city councilman and then Mayor of Eastlake a suburb of Cleveland Ohio,We have come a long way baby. Ahooooooo Wolf
http://norml.org/news/1996/10/03/ohio-high-school-cracks-down-on-hemp
Ohio High School Cracks Down On Hemp
Thursday, 03 October 1996
Students at North High School in Eastlake Ohio who wear jewelry made out of hemp fiber will be sent to the principle's office and have their parents notified, according to a new policy enacted by school officials this past Tuesday.
Critics of the policy argue that the new rule inhibits freedom of expression and amounts to nothing more than harassment. "It's extremism on the [anti-drug] issue," said Northcoast NORML chapter president John Hartman, who announced that he would provide hemp clothing and twine to interested students. "Is the intention to pick out students and harass them or attempt to enforce their drug-free school policy? Either way, [it's] persecuting them for wearing [legal] hemp jewelry."
According to principle George Spinner, a proponent of the policy, hemp jewelry symbolizes "sympathy" toward marijuana, a view that he believes to be unacceptable in a school environment. "The truth is, they are wearing it because of the relationship of hemp and marijuana."
Spinner noted that the jewelry will not be confiscated, but admits that officials are asking students not to wear it.
"By their own admission, school officials are trying to suppress a political statement about our government's policies toward marijuana and industrial hemp," said NORML Deputy Director Allen St. Pierre. "This harassment clearly infringes upon a student's constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression."
Several students have approached Northcoast NORML to complain about the new policy and some have begun to hand out fliers challenging the rule. Over 1,500 students attend the school. For more information, please contact John Hartman of Northcoast NORML at (216) 521-9333. E-mail may be addr
Most likely one of these you understand. Wolf
https://www.amazon.com/slp/manual-push-mower/3wggp6py9sta7uq
Kentucky Here is an update on the Lexington Kentucky cbd garage business trying to use the New Harvest name of Branding. They are using the circle R and deceiving the public. As soon as we get our trademark New Harvest ™? Into a New Harvest ® That New Harvest Pharms will get in my opinion a ceist and desist letter from CVSI attorney. Imo Wolf
https://newharvestpharms.com/
https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TMEP/print?version=Oct2014&href=TMEP-900d1e1285.html
906 Federal Registration Notice
The owner of a mark registered in the United States Patent and Trademark USPTO may give notice that the mark is registered by displaying with the mark the words "Registered in United States Patent and Trademark Office," the abbreviation "Reg. U.S. Pat. & Tm. Off.," or the letter R enclosed within a circle, ®. 15 U.S.C. §1111.
The registration symbol should be used only on or in connection with the goods or services that are listed in the registration.
The federal registration symbol may not be used with marks that are not actually registered in the USPTO. Even if an application is pending, the registration symbol may not be used until the mark is registered.
Registration in a state of the United States does not entitle a person to use the federal registration notice. Du-Dad Lure Co. v. Creme Lure Co., 143 USPQ 358 (TTAB 1964).
A party may use terms such as "trademark," "trademark applied for," "TM" and "SM" regardless of whether a mark is registered. These are not official or statutory symbols of federal registration.
906.01 Foreign Countries That Use Registration Symbol ®
In addition to the United States, several countries recognize use of the symbol ® to designate registration. When a foreign applicant’s use of the symbol on the specimens is based on a registration in a foreign country, the use is appropriate.
The following foreign countries use the ® symbol to indicate that a mark is registered in their country:
Belgium
China (People’s Republic)
Costa Rica
Denmark
Ecuador
Germany
Guatemala
Hungary
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Poland
Sweden
906.02 Improper Use of Registration Symbol
Improper use of the federal registration symbol that is deliberate and intended to deceive or mislead the public is fraud. See TMEP §906.04. However, misunderstandings about use of federal registration symbols are more frequent than occurrences of actual fraudulent intent. Common reasons for improper use of the federal registration symbol that do not indicate fraud are:
Mistake as to the requirements for giving notice (confusion often occurs between notice of trademark registration, which may not be given until after registration, and notice of claim of copyright, which must be given before publication by placing the notice © on material when it is first published);
Inadvertence in not giving instructions (or adequate instructions) to the printer, or misunderstanding or voluntary action by the printer;
The mistaken belief that registration in a state or foreign country gives a right to use the registration symbol (see Brown Shoe Co., Inc. v. Robbins, 90 USPQ2d 1752 (TTAB 2009); Du-Dad Lure Co. v. Creme Lure Co., 143 USPQ 358 (TTAB 1964));
Registration of a portion of the mark (see Coca-Cola Co. v. Victor Syrup Corp., 218 F.2d 596, 104 USPQ 275 (C.C.P.A. 1954));
Registration of the mark for other goods (see Duffy-Mott Co., Inc. v. Cumberland Packing Co., 424 F.2d 1095, 165 USPQ 422 (C.C.P.A. 1970), aff’g 154 USPQ 498 (TTAB 1967); Meditron Co. v. Meditronic, Inc., 137 USPQ 157 (TTAB 1963));
A recently expired or cancelled registration of the subject mark (see Rieser Co., Inc. v. Munsingwear, Inc., 128 USPQ 452 (TTAB 1961));
Another mark to which the symbol relates on the same label (see S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. v. Gold Seal Co., 90 USPQ 373 (Comm’r Pats. 1951)).
See also Sauquoit Paper Co., Inc. v. Weistock, 46 F.2d 586, 8 USPQ 349 (C.C.P.A. 1931); Dunleavy Co. v. Koeppel Metal Furniture Corp., 134 USPQ 450 (TTAB 1962), aff’d, 328 F.2d 939, 140 USPQ 582 (C.C.P.A. 1964); Radiant Mfg. Corp. v. Da-Lite Screen Co., 128 USPQ 132 (TTAB 1961); Tobacco By-Products & Chemical Corp. v. Smith, 106 USPQ 293 (Comm’r Pats. 1955), modified 243 F.2d 188, 113 USPQ 339 (C.C.P.A. 1957).
906.03 Informing Applicant of Apparent Improper Use
If a specimen in an application shows the federal registration symbol used with the mark that is the subject of the application, or with any portion of this mark, the examining attorney must determine from USPTO records whether or not such matter is registered. If it is not, and if the symbol does not appear to indicate registration in a foreign country (see TMEP §906.01), the examining attorney must point out to the applicant that the records of the USPTO do not show that the mark with which the symbol is used on the specimens is registered, and that the registration symbol may not be used until a mark is registered in the USPTO. The examining attorney should not require any explanation or comment from the applicant concerning the use of the symbol in relation to the mark.
906.04 Fraud
Improper use of the federal registration symbol, ®, that is deliberate and intends to deceive or mislead the public or the USPTO is fraud. See Copelands’ Enterprises Inc. v. CNV Inc., 945 F.2d 1563, 20 USPQ2d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 1991); Wells Fargo & Co. v. Lundeen & Associates, 20 USPQ2d 1156 (TTAB 1991).
The examining attorney may not issue a refusal of registration based on fraud. If it appears to the examining attorney that fraud on the USPTO has been committed, the examining attorney must follow the procedures outlined in TMEP §720.
SL ...CWBHF YOY 74 percent compared to CVSI 133 percent increase. ‘Every Picture Tells A Story Dont It’ Either the Young dude was bias towards the Spider or made a honest and biggly mistake you understand. U2 have a good weekend. Wolf
Q4 revenue increases 21% QoQ to US$21.5 million
Full year revenue grew 74% to US$69.5M with 30% Adjusted EBITDA and US$0.14 EPS
CV SCIENCES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2017 2016
Product sales, net (2017) $ 20,679,239 ............. (2016) $ 11,060,636
CVSI YOY December 31, 2018 at 48,244,000
SpaceLady. The Table for CVSI is Incorrect as you stated. The YOY was 133% as stated in the written form of the story, but the table shows CVSI at 41.5 Percent YOY. Not sure who set up the table, but the CVSI results in my opinion were not only wrong but misleading. Dont they fact check these hit pieces before they go to print? When I read the dudes story it appeared like it was bias towards CWEB. When I saw he had a position in CWEB And CVSI, I was somewhat surprised. I take The Street and The Fool with a grain of salt. I noticed the same discrepancies but didn’t give it a second thought. Hit pieces aren’t going to change my investment position. CWEB and CVSI stock price are similar since April. Both down around 37.5 percent since their April highs respectively. What I took from his hit piece was the fact CVSI. price per share is undervalued. I haven’t checked out CWBHF’s YOY yet. The above YOY for CVSI for year ending December 31, 2016 and 2017 is from a reliable source. The 10K from 2018 you understand. Gr8 detective work Inspector Gadget. Imo Wolf
A little TA and PYT from PLT and MJ From the Y you understand. TLC WJ
Thoughts on Cv Sciences Inc (CVSI) (2019-07-19)
Posted on July 19, 2019 by Anthony Rankin — No Comments ?
REPORTING FOR 2019-07-19 | BUNDESPREMIERLEAGUE.COM: We have conducted a deep analysis of how Cv Sciences Inc (CVSI) has been trading over the last 2 weeks and the past day especially. On its latest session, Cv Sciences Inc (CVSI) opened at 4.14, reaching a high of 4.25 and a low of 4.09 before closing at a price of 4.2. There was a total volume of 306576.
VOLUME INDICATORS: We saw an accumulation-distribution index of 29.01818, an on-balance volume of -4.2, chaikin money flow of 1.90909 and a force index of 0.002. There was an ease of movement rating of -0.00012, a volume-price trend of -0.55406 and a negative volume index of 1000.0.
VOLATILITY: We noted an average true range of 0.1802, bolinger bands of 4.09914, an upper bollinger band of 4.07086, lower bollinger band of 4.09, a bollinger high band indicator of 1.0, bollinger low band indicator of 1.0, a central keltner channel of 4.16, high band keltner channel of 4.05, low band keltner channel of 4.27, a high band keltner channel indicator of 1.0 and a low band keltner channel indicator of 1.0. There was a donchian channel high band of 4.09, a donchian channel low band of 4.09, a donchian channel high band indicator of 1.0, and a donchian channel low band indicator of 1.0.
TREND: We calculated a Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) of -0.00022, a MACD signal of -0.00012, a MACD difference of -0.0001, a fast Exponential Moving Average (EMA) indicator of 4.09, a slow Exponential Moving Average (EMA) indicator of 4.09, an Average Directional Movement Index (ADX) of unknown, an ADX positive of 20.0, an ADX negative of 20.0, a positive Vortex Indicator (VI) of 1.0, a negative VI of 1.0, a trend vortex difference of 0.8743, a trix of -9.7982, a Mass Index (MI) of 1.0, a Commodity Channel Index (CCI) of 66.66667, a Detrended Price Oscillator (DPO) of 0.62848, a KST Oscillator (KST) of -133.19452 and a KST Oscillator (KST Signal) of -133.19452 (leaving a KST difference of -0.52983). We also found an Ichimoku rating of 4.195, an Ichimoku B rating of 4.195, a Ichimoku visual trend A of 4.87512, an Ichimoku visual trend B of 4.70702, an Aroon Indicator (AI) up of 4.0 and an AI indicator down of 4.0. That left a difference of -4.0.
MOMENTUM: We found a Relative Strength Index (RSI) of 50.0, a Money Flow Index (MFI) of 20.43216, a True Strength Index (TSI) of -100.0, an ultimate oscillator of -34.15337, a stochastic oscillator of 145.45455, a stochastic oscillator signal of 145.45455, a Williams %R rating of 45.45455 and an awesome oscillator of -0.00125.
RETURNS: There was a daily return of -13.31945, a daily log return of -0.2448 and a cumulative return of -0.2445.
What the heck does all of this mean? If you are new to technical analysis, the above may be gibberish to you, and that’s OK (though we do advise learning these things). The bottom line is that AS OF 2019-07-19 (if you are reading this later, the analysis will be out of date), our analysis of technical indicators for Cv Sciences Inc (CVSI) is telling us that this is very slightly bullish. Please comment if you disagree with this conclusion or if you find any errors in the analysis above.
For a more complete analysis, run all of this through the BTMA software. Also, to stay up to date with what is happening on Cv Sciences Inc, we strongly advise Cv Sciences Inc investors to subscribe to MarketBeat.com’s daily email newsletter for updates, news and analyst ratings on stocks like Cv Sciences Inc – without this you are trading blind:
We will of course continue to cover the news and price action of Cv Sciences Inc, but it’s easiest for you to just subscribe to MarketBeat’s newsletter above so you don’t miss anything.
DISCLAIMER: We are not registered investment advisers and the above analysis should be taken at face value only. We strongly advise against buying or selling Cv Sciences Inc (CVSI) based solely on our analysis above, and are not responsible for any losses that you may incur if you choose make any investment decisions based on the above.
Java with two lumps of Diamonds you understand. The writer owns has a position in CWEB and CVSI. Wolfman Jackie