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.
This is Paul's hobby, so of course it's possible...
When the business is really someone's hobby, the product line can be updated when ever they feel like it... No real hurry, the money coming in is just pocket change and the burn rate is just money being thrown around for fun... Because they can.
Not a scam, just Paul's hobby to pass the time from his home in Beverly Hill's. Everyone has a hobby, even rich people who already have money that they can throw at it just for fun.
Paul lives in Beverly Hills, probably running this out of his house. Yes he is spending his own money to run the company, but again he lives in Beverly Hills which means he has expendable money that he can use for hobbies, such as MCIG and VTCQ.
He was probably board and needed something to do when he created MCIG, so as long as he wants to continue playing with MCIG as a hobby, what you see is what you get.
GLTA
Your in Vegas at a card table and all you need is an Ace... There are three cards in front of you flipped over. Is an Ace under one of those 3?
Because share holders stopped buying MCIG's to prop up the price. "This is a decrease in gross profits by almost -48% from FY2014."
What ever happened to Rick Ross and the MCIG band of Brand Ambassadors... And Snoody?
Anyone???? bueller, bueller, bueller....
So you're selling at .10 cents then... Like everyone else.
How are they paying for this new acquisition?
Did GEVO lose the patent?
Or did GEVO not lose the patent?
PTAB Nixes Gevo Renewable Jet Fuel Patent In AIA Review
http://www.law360.com/articles/631859/ptab-nixes-gevo-renewable-jet-fuel-patent-in-aia-review
Law360, New York (March 16, 2015, 7:14 PM ET) -- The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Friday determined that Butamax Advanced Biofuels LLC has shown in an America Invents Act review that a renewable jet fuel patent belonging to rival Gevo Inc. is not patentable in light of prior art.
In a final written decision in an inter partes review, the PTAB determined that Butamax showed by a preponderance of the evidence that the challenged claims of Gevo's U.S. Patent Number 8,546,627 are invalid as either anticipated or obvious over the prior art under Sections 102 and 103 of the Patent Act.
“It is ordered that claims 1-21 of the ’627 patent are unpatentable,” the PTAB said in its decision.
Butamax, a joint venture between BP PLC and DuPont Co., had filed its IPR petition with the PTAB seeking to review claims 1 through 21 of the '627 patent.
The board instituted a review of the patent in May, along with three other reviews of patents in the same family as the ’627 patent — U.S. Patent Numbers 8,193,402; 8,378,160; and 8,487,149. The board has yet to issue final written decisions in those IPRs.
The '627 patent relates to a method of fermenting a biomass with a microorganism, dehydrating the resultant alcohol to form biofuel precursors and then subjecting the biofuel precursors to processes that ultimately form renewable jet fuel, according to court documents.
Although the PTAB said that the '627 patent is not the subject of any other litigation, Butamax and Gevo have been frequent rivals in the courtroom.
In January, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded back to the Federal Circuit a duspite between the two parties over Gevo's alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Numbers 7,851,188 and 7,993,889. In February 2014, the Federal Circuit revived the suit after finding that U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson had incorrectly construed a key term when she granted summary judgment to Gevo that it didn't infringe Butamax's patents on a cell that produces the biofuel isobutanol.
Gevo appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court in May, asking the high court to review the standard of review for claim construction.
The high court remanded the case in light of its Jan. 20 holding in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc., which held that factual findings made by a district court when construing the claims of a patent are entitled to deference on appeal, discarding the Federal Circuit's long-standing rule that all aspects of claim construction must be reviewed de novo.
In July, Judge Robinson in another case between the two companies granted Butamax's motion for summary judgment of noninfringement of Gevo's U.S. Patent Numbers 8,017,375 and 8,017,376, which are related to the production of isobutanol from recombinant microorganisms.
A month later, though, the judge refused to award Butamax attorneys' fees after concluding that Gevo hadn’t pointlessly filed suit against its rival the day that Butamax’s patents for the biofuel issued, noting that the already extensive litigation between the two showed that the lawsuit wasn’t meritless.
Administrative Patent Judges Sheridan K. Snedden, Christopher L. Crumbley and Georgianna W. Braden sat on the panel for the PTAB.
Attorneys for both parties were not immediately available for comment on Monday.
The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent Number 8,546,627.
Butamax is represented by Deborah Sterling and Peter Jackman of Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox PLLC.
Gevo is represented by Thomas Blinka and William Brow of Cooley LLP.
The case is Butamax Advanced Biofuels LLC v. Gevo Inc., case number IPR2014-00250, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
--Additional reporting by Ryan Davis and Alex Lawson. Editing by Stephen Berg.
What's the count?
Because it was Fluff
I'm sure you still have time, fluffy feather fall quickly.
Fluff, just like that one PR last year that made a horrible 10q look great till it was released.
He fluffed the numbers once before, right before a 10k to make it look better than it really did...
The only question is do you buy what he is selling you?
http://insights.venturescanner.com/2015/04/20/introducing-the-cannabis-technology-sector/
It's well known who are the top production companies in the game.
Is mCig or Vita one of them?
MM's need to reach up to .10 cents if they want my shares.
I've been here since September 2014 quietly accumulating... Found this on my own, but I will give them a pat on the back anyway.
.10 cents is where I have my sell stop at, hopefully it does not blow past that when it does happen.
Or are they just telling you that they will buy product hoping that you will go quietly away?
Just saying
So where do you see UAPC's PPS in 90 days?
And I don't think I would be buying penny stocks if I only had three months to live. That means you would spend your final days just stock watching...
You can't be serious.
And by the way, just to piss you off I put in 10 10,000 buyer orders at .0027.
Do you really expect all anonymous investors to read an anonymous message board about a stock and something that other anonymous people are saying?
And to that, there are other message boards, so what are the chances that, that particular investor is looking at this particular message board.
28 must be someone's (or many someone's) stop loss.
I picked up 54,000 shares at .0028.
Nice shake out...
Paul created a new department, didn't he?
2015 isn't over yet...
mCig left behind in the dust, "e-cig tells your phone how much you smoke"
http://money.cnn.com/video/technology/2015/04/17/smokio-e-cig.cnnmoney/index.html?iid=HP_LN
Because of the sell the new attitude.
Doesn't this also show faith in the future of the product, company and stock?
Is it time to sell?
6. Big money left the MJJ sector
Maybe if they stop PRing that they just added a new executive level division head every week...
Are we on a bridge to know where with too many Chiefs and not enough Indians.
PEI X dropped $2.00 right after the R/S to the 2.20's then hung for a bout a month. Then 3 months later shot up to $22.00.
Sooner, rather than later.
A perfect example is PEI X pre and post split.
1 month after the R/S PEI X dropped into the $2.20's, 3 months later it started its rise to $22.00...
At this point my vote is FOR a GEVO R/S
Is someone shaking the VTCQ tree for weaklings?
And those warrants have an expiration.
Do you know the date of the expiration? Do you really expect them to exercise (dump) those warrants this early?
Really? Do you think people who read what you post are that dumb?
GEVO is a wicked good BUY!