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.
Yes, but each pill / set could have a serial number assigned and tracked to distribution points. If a box of pills has been coded and delivered to a specific pharmacy and someone OD's with some still in their pocket then tracking back to the pharmacy Dr. could show any potential abusive patterns. They are on record for saying an infinite number of markings are available to be used but i'm not sure of the cost per pill or batch to the pharmacy.
Also, since law enforcement is starting to check for marked booty they could also track prescription drugs back to the pharmacy they came from and possibly the abusing Dr(s).
I cant (yet) find where I read it about Dr. H's personal motivation to attack the counterfeit drug problem but I remember it being an issue that has affected him personally. The pharma counterfeit target goes way back with him:
(this is years old article)
SecurityStockWatch.com: Are there any other subjects you’d like to discuss?
James Hayward: The pharmaceutical industry also faces major problems relative to counterfeit, diluted or falsely labeled drugs that make their way through healthcare systems worldwide. Pharmaceutical counterfeiting and piracy impact the health and well being of consumers globally. Incidents involving counterfeit drugs have spiked in recent years with estimates of 10 percent of all prescription drugs believed to be counterfeit. These figures are higher in other parts of the world and for drugs ordered over the internet. The pharmaceutical industry loses an estimated $32 billion per year to counterfeiting globally. The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest estimates that counterfeit drug commerce will grow 13% annually through 2010 nearly twice the rate of legitimate pharmaceuticals. They further predict that counterfeit drug sales will reach $75 billion globally in 2010. The World Health Organization estimates that the prevalence of counterfeit pharmaceuticals ranges from less than 1% in developed countries to over 30% in developing countries and over 50% from illicit websites. Columbia University’s National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse reports that only 11% of internet pharmacies are legitimate. Again, the headlines are full of horror stories as a result of individuals taking counterfeit drugs. As with counterfeit documents, the counterfeiters rely on sophisticated criminal networks to infiltrate legitimate supply chains. These criminals have no regard for health, safety or human life and will stop at nothing to make a quick buck at someone else’s expense. APDN regards the protection of consumer health and safety via authentication with SigNature DNA Markers as a top priority of the company.
http://www.securitysolutionswatch.com/Interviews/in_Boardroom_ADPN.html
Too late to edit into my post but here's the link:
https://www.facebook.com/edgewaterparkpolice/posts/915206058564591:0
I did a Google search "Burlington DNA marking" and found the following Facebook post (copied/pasted)
Notice of Community Meeting for Police Presentation of Property Safety Product: October 20, 2015 6:00 PM
Location: Edgewater Park Township Municipal Court House
Hello Everyone,
Let me first apologize for this lengthy post, but I think that the information I’m providing to everyone is of great interest. I would appreciate everyone reading and also passing this information on to your fellow residents.
I recently attended a meeting of the Burlington County Chiefs of Police Association. During this meeting we were given a demonstration of new technology provided by a company called Applied DNA Sciences, Inc. This company works with identifying property using DNA Technology. Previously, this company has only used its technology for government contracts, but recently has decided to make their technology available to the public. After speaking to the representative and hearing what his company offers, the Burlington County Chiefs of Police Association and Burlington County Prosecutor unanimously endorsed this product. I will provide a brief description of how this product works and how it is used.
Applied DNA Sciences, Inc. has created a system that can be used to positively identify any persons, organizations, or businesses property. The company creates different DNA Codes in their laboratories and applies that DNA Code to a liquid that is bottled. Each bottle has its own unique identifying code. The company sells these individual bottles (about the size of a nail polish bottle) in a package. This package includes; the DNA Liquid, Stickers for home and vehicle windows, and instructions on how to apply and register the DNA Code. When an individual, business, or organization purchases their package they would use the DNA Coded Fluid to “mark” any item of value that they own. These items can include anything such as; rings, cell phones, jewelry, watches, family heirlooms, valuable properties, motor vehicle dashes, or anything else that is likely stolen. Businesses can mark their cash register drawers, cameras, DVR Units, etc. There is enough fluid in the bottle to “mark” approximately 100 items. The marking is stated to last for more than 20 years, at the least.
If an item is stolen or lost and then recovered by a Police Agency through arrest or other means, the Police Agency can then check that item for the “mark”. Police Agencies are going to be provided with specific flashlights that will shine in the proper spectrum to see the mark. Once the mark is located, police use packets that they have, provided for free by the company, and send a sample of the mark to the company through the mailing of this packet. Once the company receives this packet, they analyze the sample and are then able to tell the police agency who owns that property. Police can then contact the owner for recovery of the property and further investigation.
Simply stated, this product allows you to mark your property with a clear liquid that cannot be seen by the human eye, but can be identified by law enforcement if recovered. Many times, law enforcement agencies recover properties through arrest, found and turned in, or other means and can never find the owners information. This technology will assist in finding the owners of property and getting their property returned!
The kits is very reasonably priced at $70 per kit. As mentioned, the kit can mark up to 100 items of property. Once you pay the $70, you never have to pay for ANYTHING again. After you mark your items, you simply go online and register your DNA Fluid bottle with the company and that’s all you have to do. The company does not charge police agencies for the flashlights, evidence mail packets, or for doing the identification test itself. There is no yearly or other fees associated either.
Personally, I believe that $70 is a fantastic price to be able to protect and identify you property in this fashion. I also feel that this technology will be a deterrent to criminals will see the identification tags on homes and businesses. Criminals cannot see this mark, and even if they somehow could, this mark cannot be scrubbed off with soaps or chemicals.
Presently, all of Camden County Law Enforcement uses and has endorsed this product to the residents of Camden County as well. Burlington County Law Enforcement has now endorsed this product and it is expected that much of N.J. will do so as well.
In order to explain this product in further detail and to answer any questions anyone may have, I have arranged for a representative of Applied DNA Sciences to come to the Edgewater Park Township Municipal Building Court room just before our October 20, 2016 Township Committee Meeting. The representative will make his presentation starting at 6:00 PM, which should take about ½ hour. The representative will have some of the packets available for purchase and information on how to order a packet if you decide to do so.
Please understand and be assured, that the Police Department, Township, County, or State makes no money from the sales of this product. We simply endorse this product as we feel it is a fantastic piece of technology that is easy to use and extremely cost effective for the public. I hope to see as many of you at this meeting as possible!! Again, October 20, 2015 at 6:00 PM in the Edgewater Park Township Municipal Court Room.
Here is a link to a video from Applied DNA Sciences explaining the product in further detail if you care to take a look:
Thanks WT, I viewed this story broadcast in the Philadelphia area tonight on Fox 29 news. An officer interviewed also mentioned that Burlington county (NJ) is also implementing the DNA Net program. This was aired during the 6pm broadcast tonight.
Thanks Mike, the stripers are gonna be running any day now and I'm hitting the bathing beach area tomorrow trying for 1st fish bragging/posting rights on the barnegat fishing hole board.
When the SP finally beat the pre-split price I was amazed how many stayed long given the regrets from the lost opportunity in the .28 cent days.
I'll have my own chance now when hopefully it resumes its ascendency. Somebody once suggested having a target profit point and exit then and don't be frozen in the headlights of greed.
Good advise, we'll see.
Four calves/3 utters - yea just like having the blood sucked out of ya. Man I remember the pre-market drop after the rev. Split. At least that was a fast death. Having this short-attack develop during the trading day must have been a bitch especially for the folks at work.
It's all BS and we all know it. What surprised me was the pre market drop before the rag SA article came forward. I thought the pre/post market traders were smarter. Their panic gave this a sort-of credence factor. I wonder if any of them are part of it.
Anyway, I'm gonna take Pasta's advice and take profits presented and buy on the dips. I tried this already hence my missing the rise - guess I'll have to keep a better eye on the band for when the music stops.
Bej
OAMOT (again)
Im back! Missed the run up and lurked while the party raged.
New bag holders take heart - been there / felt that.
Path created for a recovery so hang in there.
Lucky to have this 2nd chance as I got cought flipping between 2.75 - 3.30 before the rise.
Thought I get back in after a dilution event not a short attack.
Sure you guys freaked.
Go APDN.
TCMB.
Capstone Partners with Argonne National Laboratory for Innovative DOE Pilot Program
8:30 am ET October 27, 2015 (Globe Newswire) Print
Capstone Turbine Corporation (www.capstoneturbine.com) (Nasdaq:CPST), the world's leading clean technology manufacturer of microturbine energy systems, announced today that it has partnered with Argonne National Laboratory, a non-profit science and engineering research facility operated by the University of Chicago for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), for participation in the innovative Technologist in Residence (TIR) pilot program.
"This is an enormous opportunity for Capstone, especially with the growth of the global CHP market," said Darren Jamison, President and Chief Executive Officer at Capstone Turbine.
According to the DOE website (http://energy.gov/eere/cemi/technologist-residence-pilot), the TIR pilot program is designed to foster strong national laboratory-industry relationships that result in high impact, collaborative research and development. The DOE will convene a Council of Technologists, made up of pre-selected technologist pairs, each consisting of representatives from a national laboratory and their private sector partner. Through the Council, each technologist pair will work together to identify new areas of innovative research to formulate an agreement and specific scopes of work. Under the pilot program, only seven awards for technologist partnerships were issued by the DOE, with a total funding value of $2.6 million over two years.
Building on an existing relationship, the Capstone and Argonne technologist pair will explore new focus areas, such as low cost, active combustion control systems and fuel adaptability. All of these focus areas are intended to advance the adoption of low emission, high efficiency power solutions. The pair will also meet with other national lab researchers to collaborate on new research pathways as well as infrastructural capabilities to develop new project ideas.
"This is a tremendous opportunity to improve our relationship and collaborate with Argonne National Laboratory as they are poised to help our nation build an economy fueled by safe, clean, renewable energy and free from dependence on foreign oil," said Jeff Foster, Vice President of Customer Service and Director of Program Management at Capstone Turbine. "The TIR program provides us the incentive needed to continue the advancement of world-class CHP solutions with the leverage of a national lab enterprise," added Foster.
I agree, bringing in the existing management team should expidite the FireFly commercialization process.
I wonder too if the denied lawsuit against them held that valuation down.
Lawsuit against Thermomedics.
I'm not a lawyer but is appears to me that a patent lawsuit has been dismissed.
http://www.fenwick.com/FenwickDocuments/Exergen-v-Thermomedics-Doc-118.pdf
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
__________________________________________
)
)
EXERGEN CORP., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
) Civil Action No. 13-11243-DJC
)
THERMOMEDICS, INC., et al., )
)
Defendants. )
)
)
__________________________________________)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CASPER, J.
September 15, 2015
I.
Introduction
Plaintiff Exergen Corporati
on (“Exergen”) has filed this lawsuit against Defendants
Sanomedics International Holdings, Inc., and Th
ermomedics, Inc., (collectively, “Defendants”)
alleging patent infringement.
D. 1, 17. Defendants have move
d for summary judgment on the
affirmative defense that the asserted patent cl
aims are invalid. D. 83, D. 84. For the reasons
stated below, the Court
ALLOWS
Defendants’ motion for summ
ary judgment of invalidity
under 35 U.S.C. § 101, D. 83, and
DENIES
as moot Defendants’ remaining arguments for
invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and/or § 103, D. 84.
II.
Standard of Review
The Court grants summary judgment where there
is no genuine dispute as to any material
fact and the undisputed facts de
monstrate that the moving party
is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).
“A fact is material if it carries with it the potential to affect
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 1 of 13
2
the outcome of the suit under the
applicable law.” Santiago–Ram
os v. Centennial P.R. Wireless
Corp., 217 F.3d 46, 52 (1st Cir. 200
0) (quoting Sánchez v. Alvara
do, 101 F.3d 223, 227 (1st Cir.
1996)). The movant bears the burden of dem
onstrating the absence of a genuine issue of
material fact. Carmona v. Toledo, 215 F.3d 124,
132 (1st Cir. 2000); see Celotex v. Catrett, 477
U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the movant meets its bu
rden, the non-moving party may not rest on the
allegations or denials in her pleadings,
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 256
(1986), but “must, with respect to each issue on
which she would bear the burden of proof at
trial, demonstrate that a trier of
fact could reasonably resolve that
issue in her favor
.” Borges ex
rel. S.M.B.W. v. Serrano–Isern, 605 F.3d 1, 5 (1st
Cir. 2010). “As a general rule, that requires
the production of evidence that
is ‘significant[ly] probative.’”
Id. (quoting Anderson, 477 U.S.
at 249) (alteration in original).
The Court “view[s] the record in
the light most favorable to the
nonmovant, drawing reasonable infe
rences in his favor.” Noona
n v. Staples, Inc., 556 F.3d 20,
25 (1st Cir. 2009).
III.
Factual Background
Exergen asserts that Defendants’ Caregiver
Non-Contact Thermometer has infringed four
claims of United States Patent No. 7,787,938 (the
“’938 patent”). The ’
938 patent, invented by
Dr. Francisco Pompei, Exergen’s Chief Executive
Officer, describes a method of measuring an
individual’s body temperature ba
sed upon radiation and temperatur
e measurements taken at the
temporal artery at the side of the forehead.
The patent sets forth mathematical formulas for
converting the measurements into a skin surf
ace temperature reading and then converting the
skin surface temperature into an approximation
of the subject’s core body temperature, taking
into account the ambient air temperature. D. 86-1.
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 2 of 13
8
Id. The Court warned that simply reciting an
abstract idea “while adding the words ‘apply it’”
was insufficient to “transform a patent-ineligible
abstract idea into a pate
nt-eligible invention.”
Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294).
2.
Step One: Patent-Ineligible Concepts
The first step in the § 101 anal
ysis asks “whether the claims at
issue are directed to one of
[the] patent-ineligible concepts,” namely laws of
nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas.
Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2355. The pa
rties do not seriously dispute that
the four claims at issue are
directed to patent-ineligible
concepts. Claims 51 and 54
recite a method for processing
temperature and radiation measurem
ents to estimate body temperatur
e “based on heat flow from
an internal body temperature to ambient temperat
ure.” D. 86-1 at 16. The Supreme Court has
explained that “if a law of nature
is not patentable, then neither
is a process reciting a law of
nature, unless that process has a
dditional features” that supply an
inventive concept at step two
of the § 101 analysis. Mayo, 132
S. Ct. at 1297. Claims 51 and
54 and their related dependent
claims are directed to applying mathematical models of natural thermodynamic relationships, so
the § 101 analysis proceeds to the second step.
3.
Step Two: Inventive Concept
The dispositive question is therefore, as in
Mayo: “do the patent
claims add enough to
their statements of the [natural laws and phenom
ena] to allow the processes they describe to
qualify as patent-eligible pro
cesses that apply natural laws
?” Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297
(emphases in original). The court must consider
the elements of each asserted claim individually
and as an ordered combination to determine if the
claim contains a patentable inventive concept.
Id. at 1297-98. Another district court recently c
onsidered the same § 101 question as to claims
51 and 54 of the ‘938 patent and held that the s
ubject matter of these claims was unpatentable.
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 8 of 13
9
Brooklands, 2015 WL 5096464, at *6 (g
ranting summary judgment to
defendants under § 101).
For the reasons set forth below, this Court agrees
with this conclusion and also concludes that the
dependent claims 52 and 55 do not recite
patent-eligible subject matter.
As discussed above, the independent claims
break down into processing and measuring
elements. The processing elements recite a me
thod for converting a temperature or radiation
reading to a body temperature esti
mate based on “heat flow from
an internal body temperature to
ambient temperature.” D. 86-1 at 16. These elem
ents simply describe the application of a heat
flow model, which is itself a natural phenom
enon akin in Mayo to the natural biological
relationship between concentrations of metabolites
in the blood and the necessary drug dosage.
The Mayo Court held that these elements do not c
ontribute to patentability because these clauses
simply “tell the relevant audience about th
e laws” of nature.
Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297.
The measuring elements recite the measurement
of temperature or radiation at a region of
skin of the forehead. D. 86-1 at 16. Th
e measuring elements include no limit on how
temperature or radiation is to be determine
d, leaving only the measurement of a naturally-
occurring phenomenon at a particular locatio
n on the body. These elements parallel the
“determining” elements in the Mayo patent claims
that directed the doctor to determine the level
of a certain chemical
in the subject. 132 S. Ct. at
1295. The Mayo Court found no inventive
concept in these elements because they “simpl
y tell doctors to enga
ge in well-understood,
routine, conventional activity prev
iously engaged in by scientists
in the field.” Id. at 1298.
Whether there is an inventive concept
in the measuring and
processing elements
considered together presents a closer question.
Exergen argues that wh
en taken together, the
measurement of body temperature from the surface of th
e forehead is patent eligible because this
practice was thought to be impossible at the tim
e the ’938 patent was issued. According to
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 9 of 13
10
Exergen’s expert Dr. Collins, prior to the i
ssuance of the ’938 patent, the notion that body
temperatures could be determined from skin te
mperature was not widely accepted. D. 97-1 ¶ 8.
Exergen cites a 1996 study from the Thermoregul
ation Research Laboratory at UCSF that
warned the medical community of the dangers of
using skin temperature as a substitute for
traditional core-temperature monitoring sites an
d reported a “poor correlation” between skin
temperature and core temperature. D. 97-6
at 3. The American Society for Testing and
Materials, an international organization that deve
lops technical standards, concluded in its 2003
and 2009 standards for infrared th
ermometers that skin temperat
ure could not be independently
correlated with core body temperature. D.
97-1 ¶¶ 8-9. Dr. Pompei spent years conducting
clinical trials of Exergen’s forehead ther
mometer to overcome skepticism among medical
professionals who believed that measuring temperat
ure at the forehead could not lead to accurate
estimates of core body temperature. D. 97-2 ¶¶ 5-7.
The Supreme Court has warned that “limiting an
abstract idea to one field of use” is not
enough to make the concept patentable. Bilski
v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 612 (2010). In Parker
v. Flook, the patent at issue pr
ovided a method for measuring, cal
culating and adjusting “alarm
limits” in the cata
lytic conversion of hydrocarbons. 437
U.S. 584, 585 (1978). The Court found
the claimed process unpatentable because all st
eps in the claimed process were well known and
the patent application “simply provide[d] a ne
w and presumably better method for calculating
alarm limit values.” Id.
at 594-95. As the Court later su
mmarized in Diehr, the prohibition
against patenting abstract idea
s “cannot be circumvented by atte
mpting to limit the use of [the
idea] to a particular technologi
cal environment.” Diehr, 450 U.
S. at 191 (citing Flook, 437 U.S.
at 584).
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 10 of 13
11
The Court finds persuasive the district c
ourt’s analysis in Brooklands of Ariosa
Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., 788 F.3d 1371
(Fed. Cir. 2015), a recent Federal Circuit
decision. See Brooklands, 2015 WL 5096464, at *6. The
patent in question in Ariosa claimed a
method for detecting fetal DNA in the blood of a
pregnant woman. The Fe
deral Circuit accepted
that “no one was using the plasma or serum of
pregnant mothers to amplify and detect” fetal
DNA before the issuance of the patent in ques
tion and that the disc
overy “reflect[ed] a
significant human contribution.”
788 F.3d at 1379. The Brookla
nds court explained, however,
that “[t]he discovery of a law
of nature, such as the method fo
r non-invasive fetal testing in
Ariosa . . . , no matter how novel, cannot on [its
] own amount to patentable subject matter.”
2015 WL 5096464, at *6. The Brooklands court c
ontinued, applying this analysis to the
patentability of claims 51 and 54:
Exergen may well be correct that Dr. Po
mpei’s discovery that surface skin
measurements taken at the forehead reli
ably can be converted to accurate body
temperature is novel and valuable. Howeve
r, the additional step
of measuring the
surface skin of the forehead is a necessa
ry, conventional step involving collecting
the data needed to be plugged into the ma
thematical equations
in the processing
step. Measuring temperature or radia
tion is simply not an inventive or
unconventional step in the field of thermometry.
Id. This Court agrees with this analysis.
No matter how novel the co
ncept of measuring body
temperature from forehead skin temperature or
how valuable the contribution to the medical
community, this idea as set forth in the asserted
claims is fundamentally a discovery of a natural
relationship between skin temper
ature and body temperature.
“Groundbreaking,
innovative, or
even brilliant discovery does not by itself sati
sfy the § 101 inquiry.” Ass’n for Molecular
Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S. Ct.
2107, 2117 (2013) (holding in part that discovery
and isolation of naturally occurring segment of
DNA, while “important and useful,” is not
patentable under § 101).
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 11 of 13
12
It is clear that the dependent claims, cl
aims 52 and 55, do not pr
ovide the inventive
concept missing in the independent claims. E
ach dependent claim adds the element to its
corresponding dependent claim that “the region of
the skin is over an artery.” Defendants
correctly observe that an artery is a natural elem
ent and does not add an inventive concept. D. 87
at 26. The asserted claims lack an inventive co
ncept outside of the laws of nature and are not
eligible for patent protection.
1
4.
Machine-or-Transformation Test
Finally, Exergen looks to the machine-or-tra
nsformation test to bolster the patent-
eligibility of its asserted claims
. D. 97 at 21. This test remains “a useful and important clue” for
considering § 101 invalidity challe
nges, but it is not the definitive
test for patent eligibility.
Bilski, 561 U.S. at 604. Under this
test, a claimed process is “pat
ent-eligible unde
r §101 if: (1)
it is tied to a particular machine or apparatus; or (2) it transforms a particular article into a
different state or thing.” Id. at
602 (internal citation omitted). Ex
ergen argues that the claims in
question “transform data, namely, temperature or
radiation measurements taken from forehead
skin, into a body temperature read
ing.” D. 97 at 22. However, the Court finds no transformative
element here, where the claims simply apply a ma
thematical formula to temperature or radiation
measurements and do not change the measurements
“into a different state or
thing.” Bilski, 561
U.S. at 602.
1
In reaching this conclusion, the Court has
not placed weight on Defendants’ argument
that measuring temperature at the forehead is not an “inventive concept” because it was
anticipated by prior art. D. 87 at 30. The ques
tion of whether a particular invention is novel is
“wholly apart from whether the
invention falls into a category
of statutory subject matter.”
Diehr, 450 U.S. at 190 (interna
l quotation and citation omitted).
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 12 of 13
13
VI.
Conclusion
As the asserted claims are invalid under §
101, the Court need not reach Defendants’
alternative arguments for invalidity on the groun
ds of anticipation and obviousness under §§ 102
and 103. For the foregoing reasons, the Court
ALLOWS
Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101, D. 83, and
DENIES
as moot Defendants’ motion
for summary judgment of invalidity unde
r 35 U.S.C. § 102 and/or § 103, D. 84.
So Ordered.
/s/ Denise J. Casper
United States District Judge
Case 1:13-cv-11243-DJC Document 118 Filed 09/15/15 Page 13 of 13
Pa., N.J. utilities push gas pipeline
They say a Marcellus supply would lower prices and stimulate the economy.
BY ANDREW MAYKUTH INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
A group of New Jersey and Pennsylvania utilities moved forward Thursday with a controversial $1 billion project to tap into Marcellus Shale natural gas production, saying the new pipeline would deliver low gas prices, stable electricity rates, and a manufacturing renaissance to the region.
PennEast Pipeline Co. filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a certificate of public convenience and necessity, which would authorize PennEast to build the 118-mile pipeline from Luzerne County to the Trenton area.
The PennEast Pipeline, one of several major infrastructure projects in the works to deliver energy from newly developed Appalachian shale fields, already has become a battleground of competing visions for America’s energy future between advocates of low-cost domestic gas production and fossil-fuel opponents.
“This safe, state-of-the-art infrastructure project will not only help meet the region’s energy demands; it can power New Jersey and Pennsylvania’s economies for years to come,” said Peter Terranova, chairman of PennEast’s board of managers.
Environmental groups vowed to oppose FERC’s authorization, which would allow the pipeline to claim easements by eminent domain, if necessary.
“This pipeline is not needed in New Jersey, and our land, water, and communities should not be sacrificed for this ill-conceived pipeline,” said Tom Gilbert, campaign director of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation.
The organizers of the pipeline, which would be built and operated by a subsidiary of UGI Corp. of Valley Forge, say construction would begin in early 2017. In addition to FERC approval, the project requires review by the Delaware River Basin Commission, the States of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Of the pipeline’s one billion cubic feet a day of capacity, 72 percent is committed to local gas utilities, Terranova said. Power-plant operators and gas producers have locked up the rest.
In addition to UGI, whose Pennsylvania gas utilities would tie into the pipeline, PennEast’s partners include affiliates of most of New Jersey’s gas utilities: Public Service Electric & Gas Co., South Jersey Gas, Elizabethtown Gas, and New Jersey Gas.
Spectra Energy, which operates the Texas Eastern Transmission pipeline, also has joined the project with the aim of increasing capacity to customers in Southwest Philadelphia and suburban counties.
Pipeline opponents, including Delaware River-keeper Network and the Sierra Club, have encouraged landowners to turn away PennEast’s surveyors to slow the process.
Pat Kornick, PennEast’s spokeswoman, said many of the route modifications incorporated in the 11 months since PennEast began a “pre-filing” process of public meetings and preliminary FERC submissions were done at the behest of landowners. PennEast has scouted the route using aerial surveys and other mapping tools.
PennEast’s supporters say they recognize the pipeline is a hardship for some affected landowners but tout the broader economic benefits.
“Yes, it’s inconvenient for somebody to have a stretch of pipeline go through their yard or their neighborhood park,” said David N. Taylor, president of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association, “but the benefit which will be enjoyed by all communities all across the commonwealth depends upon having that infrastructure deployed.”
More information, including a detailed map, is on the company’s website: www.penneastpipeline.com. amaykuth@phillynews.com
215-854-2947 @maykuth
Wow, 112 patents. Great read - thanks for sharing captn.
Intraday VWAP (blue line):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/55587022/apdnvwap.jpg
Intraday VWAP (blue line) graph:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/55587022/cpstvwap.jpg
Thanks WB, nice that the O&G peeps are installing in an already powered site(s) and not just remote unsupplied locations. Efficiency sake and fault-tolerant application. Ey, if the Saudies want a price war - bring it.
Domestic too - no currency exchange issues.
Otis, just a quick reply before night-night. Nissha is one of our earliest business partners... Not sure what your point is. As far a revenue from them it is never publicized specifically. I believe they initially DNA marked seafood.
Hey Mike, I'm back and feeling much better now (similar quoted movie line). Actually when the SEC filing a couple months back re shelf peeeeed me off cause I knew we would take a hit. We were around 3.30ish then so I bailed and lurked cause I didn't want to post without skin in the game. Got my butt kicked elsewhere so I figured hey APDN's as good a butt kicker as an other so I'm back in today after reviewing the PDF referenced on the APDN website and the SP seems to have bottomed. I actually thought it would get down close to 2.00 but ey still time especially since I re antied.
Anusway, I hope to contribute some but your extensive DD is second to none. I'll have to get back on the issues you posed me. I'm not familiar with them except I will say the Chromelogic may be the Mil's attempt to have multiple options/redundancy in place such is their M.O.
Just got my boat back re engine transplant since August and runs great. Moved to Holiday Harbor and anytime your in the area and want to "hook-up" just say the word: 24' CC w/T-Top.
Good to be back. Just had a tantrum.
Intraday VWAP graph:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/55587022/apdnvwap.jpg
blue=vwap
yellow=sp
red/green bars=vol
Updated intraday vwap graph:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/55587022/cpstvwap.jpg
vwap graph intraday:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/55587022/cpstvwap.jpg
blue=vwap
yellow=sp
red/green bars=vol
Yes its an average (blue line) share price (vwap) at the corresponding point in time as the trade(s) in yellow line. No science on my part - I'm using a tool name QuoteTracker linked to my TD acct.
Happy to post updates as I can. Im in/out doing chores today (retired/sort-of...).
Trying something new here - VWAP graph.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/55587022/cpstvwap.jpg
(blue = VWAP)
I'll second that WildBill - enjoy reading your posts. Especially the VWAP's. Very esoteric from my non expert level so like a puppy I rely on tone :)
Also the PGW site is the location of the recent Amtrak derailment.
$60M LNG plant planned in N.E. Pa.
UGI Energy Services is expanding its alternative fuel footprint with 120,000-gallon-a-day facility.
BY ANDREW MAYKUTH INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
UGI Energy Services is doubling its capacity to produce liquefied natural gas, aiming to capture a bigger share of an alternative-fuel market for which Philadelphia Gas Works also has ambitions.
UGIES, a subsidiary of UGI Corp. of Valley Forge, announced Friday that it plans to build a $60 million plant in northeastern Pennsylvania to produce up to 120,000 gallons of LNG a day from 10 million cubic feet of Marcellus Shale natural gas.
The Wyomissing, Pa., company currently operates an LNG plant in Berks County.
LNG is produced by chilling natural gas to about 260 degrees below zero. At the new plant, UGIES plans to build storage tanks with a total capacity of about 280,000 gallons to maintain the supercooled fuel in a liquid state, said Matthew Dutzman, vice president of business development.
Traditionally, utilities have used LNG to store gas for high-demand winter days, a practice known as “peak-shaving.” Along with the shale-gas boom, LNG is experiencing growth in demand as a cleaner-burning, less costly alternative to diesel.
The new plant will allow UGIES to expand sales of LNG to emerging markets in the trucking industry and for remote power-generators, such as gas-drilling rigs or factories that are not served by gas utilities, Dutzman said. LNG also is being promoted as an alternative fuel for trains and ships that now burn diesel or oil.
Philadelphia Gas Works, the city-owned utility, is exploring an expansion of its LNG plant in Port Richmond after experiencing success selling surplus LNG to transportation markets. PGW says it received so much response to its expansion plans that it is considering enlarging its initial plan to add 15 million cubic feet of production capacity.
The PGW proposal is still in its preliminary stages, and would require approval of the Philadelphia Gas Commission and City Council. Council also is exploring proposals to enlist private partners to participate in an LNG project.
UGI, which operates three Pennsylvania gas utilities, has operated an LNG plant in Temple, Pa., since 1972. The Berks County plant was recently expanded to produce up to 120,000 gallons a day, the equivalent of 10 million cubic feet of gas.
The new facility would be adjacent to UGIES’s Manning natural-gas compression station in Wyoming County. The gas would be supplied by the company’s Auburn gathering system, which collects gas from local Marcellus Shale wells before delivering it to major interstate pipelines serving the region.
UGI is also the operator of the proposed $1 billion Penn East Pipeline, which would deliver natural gas from northeastern Pennsylvania to New Jersey utilities. amaykuth@phillynews.com
215-854-2947 @maykuth
Interesting comments regarding the Wrightspeed’s “Fulcrum” via Ask Management page (sorry if already posted).
May 6, 2015
Question:
Has Wrightspeed replaced the CPST K30 and K60 with its own Technology the Fulcrum?
Answer from Capstone Management:
Capstone has a C30 and C65 product that can be used in various electric vehicle applications. Wrightspeed recently announced it is developing a new 80kW “Fulcrum” turbine at the ACT Expo in Dallas, Texas. Capstone has been working collaboratively with Wrightspeed and founder Ian Wright for several years to develop a microturbine-based electric vehicle solution.
As of this date, we have not been formally notified by Wrightspeed of a decision to stop working with Capstone in light of them developing their own 80kW product. A Capstone C30 powered Isuzu vehicle was displayed by Wrightspeed at the ACT Expo May 4-7, 2015 in Dallas, Texas. The two vehicles that FedEx is currently testing and using for demonstration purposes are still utilizing the Capstone C30 turbines products to the best of our knowledge.
According to recent conversations with Mr. Wright all three turbines are operating satisfactorily, and the next 25 units for FedEx were delayed due to non-Capstone related Wrightspeed power train issues. Capstone is taking Wrightspeed’s “Fulcrum” turbine announcement seriously, but because of the potential legal implications that may surround this new development, Capstone will not be making any further formal statements on this matter until clarification occurs.
Ref: http://www.capstoneturbine.com/investor/ask-management.asp
Thanks Capt. Never left just lurking and averaging down... Some Analyst a month or so ago was the low price estimator of somewhere about where we are now. If this is the bottom I wonder how they knew.
1.4 mw 2 sites, just like the captn been saying...
Love it. 90% efficient!
Impressive.
Here's the link JL - good exposure.
Applied DNA Sciences to offer anti-counterfeiting products for pharmaceuticals
Yes, you could be right AG. As penny retail investors we don't have the info. large investors would be privy to. And the looming (no pun) dilution which is certain to unfold is concerning.
But... no other tech can do what this consumable, encrypting, uncopyable and enduring tagging can do. Rapid in-field reading opens many possibilities even if not at the consumer level.
I view it as a weighing of the negative dilution vs the next block busting PR.
Up front assurances are too late - no gamble there.
It's a tough road and even as the track record is poor the gamble has vast potential given the diverse markets available.
GL & I feel your pain.
Not just counterfeiting but scourge fighting. Imagine a mandate directing distributors to pharmacies to mark abused drugs such as Oxycontin.
Law enforcement would be able to trace the source of the drug back to the supplier.
Significant takeaway from yesterdays PR - APDN has incorporated its SigNature DNA into ordinary pharmaceutical grade inks. see: Pharmaceutical ink. Point here is the ink is ingestible.
...successfully marked more than 10,000 prescription drugs, acetaminophen gel-tabs see: Counterfeit Products Sold Containing Acetaminophen. No doubt we are targeting popular and dangerous drugs.
Also ...and aspirin tablets with the DNA-embedded ink see: France seizes a million doses of fake Chinese aspirin. No surprise here and something as simple as everyday Asperin.
A nice national broadcast TV feature is due.
OAMOT
From Forbes article on Wrightspeed:
The company has raised $32 million to date, and is now raising additional capital to get into volume production for its 110,000 square foot plant in Alameda, CA. At full strength, the company should be able to produce powertrains for as many as 5,000 trucks per year and employ up to 300 workers. Most of the repower kits will be assembled in Alameda and then shipped to other locations to be installed locally.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterdetwiler/2015/03/04/electric-garbage-trucks-huge-energy-savings-and-they-wont-wake-you-up-in-the-morning/
Article mentions turbine generator but not Capstone.
...chose Capstone microturbines over reciprocating engines for their ability to meet local building and air emissions requirements as well as their proven field experience and service support. Capstone microturbines also meet SCAQMD BACT emissions levels that allow for a streamlined air emissions permitting process.
They say never fall in love with a stock but i'm smitten.
Great to be selected as best solution too.
"The brewery, like many of our clients, vetted multiple technologies, including traditional reciprocating engines. However, the Capstone solution presented the best option, offering a clean emission technology to act as the base load for a smart grid installation," said Steven Acevedo, President and CEO at Regatta Solutions.