![](http://investorshub.advfn.com/images/default_ih_profile2_4848.jpg?cb=0)
Wednesday, July 31, 2019 11:30:42 AM
This means that ICM could theoretically be issued a patent that improved on a Greenshift patent and then claim that Greenshift was infringing on ICM's improvement on it. It may sound like bad logic, but it is good legal theory.
Yes it could, if Greenshift was using a technology that wasn't covered with their own patent.
However, your reply was:
If ICM's patents were in dispute, wouldn't Greenshift's original lawsuit have mentioned it, and wouldn't ICM have filed its' own lawsuit, claiming that Greenshift was infringing on its' own patented technology?
To do so ICM should have been confident that their technology did improve the GERS technology in an unique way and GERS was using the improvement made by ICM without having it in Greenshift's original patent.
So I think you answered your own question "wouldn't ICM have filed its' own lawsuit, claiming that Greenshift was infringing on its' own patented technology?".
North Bay Resources Announces Mt. Vernon Gold Mine Bulk Sample, Sierra County, California • NBRI • Sep 11, 2024 9:15 AM
One World Products Issues Shareholder Update Letter • OWPC • Sep 11, 2024 7:27 AM
Kona Gold Beverage Inc. Reports $1.225 Million in Revenue and $133,000 Net Profit for the Quarter • KGKG • Sep 10, 2024 1:30 PM
Element79 Gold Corp Announces 2024 Clover Work Plans & Nevada Portfolio Updates • ELMGF • Sep 10, 2024 11:00 AM
Nightfood Holdings Inc. Completes Major Step on Uplist Journey by Closing Strategic All-Stock Acquisition of CarryoutSupplies.com • NGTF • Sep 10, 2024 8:15 AM
Element79 Gold Corp. Announces Sale of 100% Interest in Elder Creek, North Mill Creek, and Elephant Projects to 1472886 B.C. Ltd. • ELEM • Sep 9, 2024 9:34 AM