News Focus
News Focus
icon url

flptrnkng

08/27/10 12:31 PM

#67866 RE: Steady_T #67864

Agilyx's patent exists, JBI's is only talked about

Agilyx filed their patent back in 2006; JBI is still talking about a forward looking possibility of filing one.

Agilyx has other patents pending as well, their claim.

Agilyx has a plant that operates continuously, produces oil, which is being sold.

JBI is still talking about forward looking events of doing the same thing.
icon url

puppydotcom

08/27/10 1:02 PM

#67883 RE: Steady_T #67864

mixing up reality (agliyx production and revenue ) with JBII's .. someday we will ( still no permit ) is not wise

do you really think these very strong and clearly advanced companies are going to sit around and wait for JBII ...

yea no, they wont - lol

improvements, advancements in design and productivity are ongoing
JBII in in the south 40 now ... by stupid mistakes and bad management decisions
icon url

Scandle34

08/27/10 9:41 PM

#67974 RE: Steady_T #67864

I have no need to comment further onn Agilyx's patent if we operate under atmospheric pressure - with or without an inert nitrogen purge. Taking away a claimed element of a system or method patent does not infringe. Adding an element (eg the catalyst) but still using all of the claimed elements does.

Note that if you add an element but use all of the elements, you have protection against others adding that element but you still infringe on the prioi patent.

The patent is a dead issue - other than to remind us that, with enough subtext after "comprising" a new patent can be obtained.