So far everything Jones has submitted has made it to Final Rejection.
With the first being abandoned and the most recent being mailed a final rejection. At this time there isn't any patents pending - Jones can file for a extension and it generally granted - but it hasn't been filed.
Plus, it seems very unlikely that Jones will receive anything but another rejection.
My thoughts were that it was at least misleading to include in the Jones Bio on the that he has a patent pending.
It is similar to the aquaponics operations in the Mojave desert - where are they?
It has to do with Patent #5,046,451, and US Patent Application #2006/0163131. It's in the 16 page report by the examiner in Application #14/051,060, toward the bottom. More on that later.
“If someone where to show proof that there was a final rejection issued, and there was zero chance for the patent to be granted, I would agree that representing the invention as 'patent pending' would be misleading, and improper.”
You’ve already seen I-GLOW’s posting of the screen shots. But there’s more:
Then click on the tab at the top that says “Image File Wrapper.” What does the very first line say: “Final Rejection.”
On that first line, all the way to the right, where it says page count, check the box and click on “PDF.” When you get to the 16 page report, on page 2, under “Office Action Summary,” look at box “2a)” It says:
“This action is FINAL (?------ the upper case and bold was done by the examiner, not me.)
Now, let’s go back to your statement:
““If someone where to show proof that there was a final rejection issued, and there was zero chance for the patent to be granted, I would agree that representing the invention as 'patent pending' would be misleading, and improper.”
How many statements directly from the USPTO of the phrase “final rejection” do you require?
As for the second part of your statement “…and there was zero chance for the patent to be granted.”
That’s the easiest part to answer (even easier than the first part, if you can believe it).
The reason Trent R. Jones will never get his patent pending status is because the application he put together was a complete farce. He was doomed before he even began. He abandoned his first attempt because he knew, based on what the examiner was telling him, that his attempt to patent his idea was completely useless.
So, he waited a year or so, changed the wording around, went at it from a different angle, but didn’t fool anyone. He made the same stupid mistakes, and ended up with the same examiner.
Odessa99, if you truly, honestly want to know why his patent pending was rejected, read those 16 pages. You aren’t going to believe how badly he presented his case to the patent office. They basically shot down everything he put in his proposal. Claims 1, 3-13, 15-20 all rejected. If you read the report, you’ll understand why. It’s actually laughable.
He didn’t respond in time; didn’t respond with the appropriate answers; He described in such general terms things about motors and pumps, etc,, that they were all rejected because there was no specificity involved. He couldn’t give them any details on how all this ‘stuff’ was going to work. He just threw in a bunch of high sounding crap, thinking he could get away with it, and got caught, every single time!
He was trying to patent things that were not patentable because they occurred in nature, naturally. The examiner would then finish this statement with this statement:
“A natural phenomenon is not a process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, and is not eligible for patent protection.” This statement was made several times.
And if that wasn’t enough, later on, the examiner rejected his patent application for two more reasons: 1) One previous patent: Patent #5,046,451. The examiner refers to “Denton,” one of the inventors. Apparently, he DID answer all the questions, provide proof, etc, of their idea and was given a patent.
2) Another refers to a person named “Inslee”, US Patent Application #2006/0163131. The same thing was said. In his documents, he provided the answers the examiner wanted,
Trent R. Jones failed miserably with this. He provided nothing that the examiner could even nod at. It was a horribly lame attempt to get a patent pending.
So, there are two huge reasons these patents will never see the light of day. Can’t get any bigger: Can’t patent what occurs naturally in nature, and can’t issue a patent that overrides an already existing patent.
It has to make one wonder if his California Mojave Desert story is b.s., too. Maybe he was trying to do this, but then gave it up when both his patents were rejected. And yes, his first patent, 13/279/541, was rejected. It was then reopened and then abandoned by Jones. So he had both of his patent applications rejected.
The examiner stuck his fork in Trent R. Jones’ patent application and pronounced it DONE! Twice! Now we’ll see if he removes this from his resume, or if he continues to try to fool people. Leaders who try to pull this crap are not to be trusted. Be honest and upfront or go somewhere else. I get so sick and tired of these worn our wannabe CEO’s. It should be real obvious now that I-GLOW was correct from the beginning – David runs this company, top to bottom. Calkin didn’t, and Trent sure doesn’t. At least Calkin is from this area. Trent’s in Peru, Indiana! He might as well be in Peru!
Remember, this guy is our CEO. A Chiropractor residing in Peru, IN., running a company located in an empty office in Winnetka, CA with employees who work out of their homes. They don’t all go to the same office every day to work with one another. How much work can you possibly get done doing business that way? Is it too much for the shareholders to ask that these companies at least TRY to act and look professional? Most of the people on this message board could present a better picture of GRCU.
Anyway, Odessa99, forget the patent pending stuff. It ain’t gonna happen.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
