Green Energy Enterprises Inc. (GYOG)

[SJOGRINGO]

Reply to IR QASP/CET Patent Drama Continues

Monday, August 16, 2010 4:28 PM
From: This sender is DomainKeys verified"xxxx xxxxx" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]: "Kimberly Morrison" <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]

Dear IR QASP,

Thank you for your timely reply. I am extremely uneasy with your response concerning the CET / Solaroli patent. WHY will Mr Bradley NOT address public information to Stockholders. Something very wrong here.

Today I have been made aware of the following information, which may or may not be true, but QASP SILENCE on this issue has me very concerned.

I am again forwarding copy to Kimberly Morrison and the Editor of the Jacksonville Business Journal in hopes they can access the information that should be made public by a public company. Something doesn't smell right... I'm afraid... Please put my doubts to rest....

Thank you,
xxxx xxxxx
xxx xxx xxxx

Posted by: islandinvestor Date: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:34:38 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 177975

Just got off phone with patent office

Called assignment division at US Patent Office. She told that there is a possible gap in ownership of patent. Both assignment were done electronically. She did not know where CET assignment came from. She said that there should be another assignment from ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC to CET INTERNATIONAL, INC. She recommended trying to get a copy of second assignment from CET INTERNATIONAL, INC. or trying different division of patent office at [phone].(will need a fax, I don't have one)
She said second assignment could be challenged by ALBERTO SOLAROLI and taken off patent.

Now remember this from article http://lastturnclub.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=148&Itemid=1

Communications to Coffee

Having gone from communications to coffee, then back to communications, Infinite Networks Corporation decided to make another of its frequent and radical strategic moves in 2006 by dumping its communication-focused holdings. Eller Industries was acquired, then its shares distributed to Infinite’s own registered shareholders to accomplish the divestiture. The new strategy (or, as the company termed it, focus) was in energy. There, it created a new subsidiary, Cosmic Energy Corporation with Donald Miller (former Infinite CEO) at the helm. Its big move, however, was to be the acquisition of CET, LLC, a Florida corporation that (in the words of a recent Infinite document)(1) “represented it had a worldwide license for the Solaroli patented technology," (U.S. Patent 6,282,898). Infinite and Alberto Solaroli signed the agreement on January 25, 2006. The acquisition was completed in October 2006.

Misunderstanding

A Porsche was showcased by Mr. Solaroli to show that the technology was viable. Infinite’s goal was to develop the retrofit market as soon as possible. Mr. Solaroli wanted to focus on the racing industry and build new engines using this technology that would further provide technical data for commercialization and gain worldwide recognition. There was nothing remarkable in the progress made other than its slow pace relative to Mr. Solaroli’s statements elsewhere, and perhaps also relative to the expectations of Infinite. In any case, trouble between the parties was brewing. In its March filing, Infinite said,

“Subsequent to the signing of the original acquisition agreement, Infinite discovered, among other matters, that no patent assignment to CET International had been recorded at the U.S. Patent Office. As part of the completion of the acquisition, a closing agreement was entered into with the reorganization parties and Al Solaroli individually in which Mr. Solaroli again represented that he had assigned the patent rights to CET International and that he would cause the assignment to be recorded in the U.S. Patent Office. Mr. Solaroli has been repeatedly asked to record the patent assignment, but has (according to a March, 2007 company document) failed to do so.

As a result of the failure of Al Solaroli to record the patent assignment, and the resultant inability of Infinite to show that it has a license agreement backed by the recorded ownership of the patent in CET International, Infinite has not been able to move forward with the exploitation of its license rights or to seek additional capital based on having the license rights.”(3)



Looks like CET International, Inc. does not have rights to patent.
That is why Infinite Networks deal never fell through.

Owner of patent is ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC


=======================================================