Case 1:13-cv LJM-DML Document 1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Similar documents
Case 1:10-cv LJM-DML Document 186 Filed 11/09/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 2242

Case 1:10-cv Document 1 Filed 05/03/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY DEMAND

Case 0:10-cv PJS-FLN Document 1 Filed 05/03/10 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

COMPLAINT. Plaintiff, The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC ( Green Pet Shop or. Plaintiff ), by and through its attorneys, THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236 COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case: 5:09-cv DDD Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/04/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS VICTORIA DIVISION

Case 2:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Case No. 3:13-cv N

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 9:16-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2016 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5

Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

Case 2:13-cv RJS Document 2 Filed 03/06/13 Page 1 of 16

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 08/24/10 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Case 2:14-cv JRG Document 1 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 4:14-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Plaintiff, C.A. No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT THE PARTIES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 8:17-cv EAK-JSS Document 114 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID 2433 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 1:16-cv JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/26/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.

Case 1:11-cv LPS Document 14 Filed 01/30/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 59 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 3:14-cv RS-EMT Document 1 Filed 03/28/14 Page 1 of 11

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:15-cv-590 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

Case 1:07-cv MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case 1:10-cv Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. COMPLAINT

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Case 2:14-cv Document 1 Filed 10/10/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case: 1:17-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/15/17 1 of 12. PageID #: 1

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 44 Filed 06/15/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 457

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 3:17-cv AJB-KSC Document 1 Filed 05/23/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

Case 2:12-cv JCM-VCF Document 1 Filed 11/13/12 Page 1 of 10

Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 01/13/15 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT

Case 8:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:15-cv CW Document 2 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) Plaintiff,

Case 1:16-cv BMC Document 8 Filed 08/16/16 Page 1 of 93 PageID #: 73 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. Civil Action No JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case 1:99-mc Document 417 Filed 05/23/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/08/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:17-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/15/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Civil Action No: HON. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Case 9:18-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2018 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.

Case 1:99-mc Document 689 Filed 12/01/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case 2:14-cv HRH Document 37 Filed 12/08/14 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Case 3:16-cv MEJ Document 1 Filed 06/16/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:14-cv Document 1 Filed 02/18/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv LY Document 1 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 3:12-cv-686

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 1:16-cv AKH Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 21. Case No.

Case 1:18-cv YK Document 1 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA COMPLAINT

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

Case 1:10-cv GMS Document 1-3 Filed 06/21/10 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/15/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Case 2:10-cv TJW Document 1 Filed 10/12/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

case 3:14-cv TLS-CAN document 1 filed 03/21/14 page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/12/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:1

Case 6:17-cv Document 1 Filed 04/05/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1

Case 2:11-cv RAJ -FBS Document 1 Filed 04/05/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Transcription:

Case :-cv-00-ljm-dml Document Filed 0// Page of PageID #: 0 0 MARK D. MILLER, Ca. Bar No. MARCUS N. DiBUDUO, Ca. Bar No. SIERRA IP LAW PC 00 N. Fruit Avenue, Suite 0 Fresno, CA Telephone: () -00 Facsimile: () -00 ANDREW C. RYAN (to be admitted pro hac vice) CANTOR COLBURN LLP 0 Church St., nd Floor Hartford, CT 00 Telephone: (0) - Facsimile: (0) -0 Attorneys for Plaintiff GS CLEANTECH CORPORATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION GS CLEANTECH CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, v. Plaintiff, AEMETIS, INC., a Delaware corporation, and AEMETIS ADVANCED FUELS KEYES, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendants. * * * Case No. COMPLAINT DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff, GS CleanTech Corporation, for its Complaint, does hereby, through its attorneys, allege as follows: THE PARTIES. Plaintiff, GS CleanTech Corporation (hereinafter GS CleanTech ), is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business at 0 Shiloh Road East, Suite N, Alpharetta, Georgia 000. GS CleanTech is a wholly-owned subsidiary of GreenShift Corporation (hereinafter GreenShift ), a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business at 0 Shiloh Road East, Suite N, Alpharetta, Georgia 000.

Case :-cv-00-ljm-dml Document Filed 0// Page of PageID #: 0 0. Upon information and belief, Defendant Aemetis, Inc. (hereinafter Aemetis ) is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business at 000 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 00, Cupertino, California 0.. Upon information and belief, Defendant Aemetis Advanced Fuels Keyes, Inc. ( AEAFK ) is a Delaware corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Aemetis having its principal place of business at 000 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 00, Cupertino, California 0. JURISDICTION. This is a claim for patent infringement and arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title of the United States Code. This Court has original jurisdiction over the subject matter of this claim under U.S.C. and (a).. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because, upon information and belief and among other things, they reside in and/or directly, or indirectly through their agents, transact business in this judicial District, have committed acts within this judicial District giving rise to this action and/or at least by offering to sell, selling, purchasing, and/or advertising the infringing products and/or placing them into the stream of commerce in such a way as to reach customers in this judicial District, and/or because they have sufficient minimum contacts with this judicial District. Requiring Defendants to respond to this action will not violate due process. VENUE. Upon information and belief, Defendants reside in this judicial District, directly, or indirectly through their agents, transact business in this judicial District and/or have committed acts within this judicial District giving rise to this action. Venue is proper in this judicial District under U.S.C. (b), (c) and 00(b). BACKGROUND FACTS. GS CleanTech is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No.,0,, entitled Method Of Processing Ethanol Byproducts And Related Subsystems, issued on October, 00 ( the patent ). A true and correct copy of the patent is attached

Case :-cv-00-ljm-dml Document Filed 0// Page of PageID #: 0 hereto as Exhibit A. The patent issued from a patent application originally filed on May, 00 as Serial No. /, ( the application ) and published on February, 00 as U.S. Patent Application Publication 00/00. See Exhibit A. Both the patent and the application claim priority to GS CleanTech s first patent application related to its novel corn oil extraction methods and systems, which was filed in August of 00 as a provisional application (Serial No. 0/0,00) ( the 00 provisional application ). Id. The patent and the patent application are generally directed to the recovery of corn oil from the byproducts produced during the manufacture of ethanol from corn. Id.. GS CleanTech has standing to sue for infringement of the patent because it owns all right, title and interest in and to the patents-in-suit, including the right to collect for past and future damages. infringement. GS CleanTech has suffered injury from Defendant s acts of patent 0. GS CleanTech invented a novel patented process to extract corn oil from the byproducts created during the manufacture of ethyl alcohol. This process is claimed in the patent. 0. Recently, significant attention has been given to the production of ethyl alcohol, or ethanol, for use as an alternative fuel. Ethanol not only burns cleaner than fossil fuels, but also can be produced using grains such as corn, which are abundant and renewable domestic resources.. In the United States, ethanol is typically produced from corn. Corn contains significant amounts of sugar and starch, which are fermented to produce ethanol.. A popular method of producing ethanol is known as dry milling, whereby the starch in the corn is used to produce ethanol through fermentation. In a typical dry milling method, the process starts by grinding each kernel of corn into meal, which is then slurried with water into mash. Enzymes are added to the mash to convert the starch to sugar. Yeast is then added in fermentors to convert the sugar to ethanol and carbon dioxide. After fermentation, the mixture is transferred to distillation columns where the ethanol is evaporated and recovered as

Case :-cv-00-ljm-dml Document Filed 0// Page of PageID #: 0 0 product, leaving an intermediate product called whole stillage. The whole stillage contains the corn oil and the parts of each kernel of corn that were not fermented into ethanol.. Despite containing valuable corn oil, the whole stillage has traditionally been treated as a byproduct of the dry milling fermentation process and used primarily to supplement animal feed mostly in the form of a product called dried distillers grains with solubles (hereinafter DDGS ).. Prior to GS CleanTech s invention, efforts to recover the valuable corn oil from the whole stillage had not been successful in terms of efficiency or economy. A need therefore existed for a more efficient and economical manner of recovering corn oil. GS CleanTech has filled that need with its novel and inventive process.. The inventors of the novel process, David Cantrell and David Winsness, completed feasibility testing with an early-stage corn oil extraction prototype in 00 and demonstrated, for the first time, that efficient extraction of the corn oil trapped in the dry milling byproducts was economically feasible.. In August of 00, the inventors filed the 00 provisional application directed to their novel corn oil extraction methods and systems. The patent-in-suit claims priority back to the 00 provisional application.. In one embodiment, GS CleanTech s patented method comprises initially processing the whole stillage by mechanically separating (such as by using a centrifugal decanter) the whole stillage into distillers wet grains and thin stillage, and then introducing the thin stillage into an evaporator to form a concentrated byproduct or syrup. Prior to recombining the now concentrated syrup with the distillers wet grains, the syrup is introduced into a second mechanical separator, such as a second centrifuge, which is different from the centrifuge that mechanically separated the whole stillage into distillers wet grains and thin stillage. This second centrifuge separates corn oil from the syrup thereby allowing for the recovery of usable corn oil. The syrup that exits the centrifuge is then recombined with the distillers wet grain and dried in a dryer to form the DDGS. The corn oil that is extracted from the syrup can be used for various purposes such as feedstock for producing biodiesel.

Case :-cv-00-ljm-dml Document Filed 0// Page of PageID #: 0 0. After filing the 00 provisional application in 00, the inventors of GS CleanTech s novel corn oil extraction method began to engage the ethanol manufacturing industry to explain and market the corn oil extraction method itself and the benefits to be had by ethanol manufacturers if they were to install these systems in their facilities. In fact, in 00, the inventors invited ethanol manufacturers to a symposium to hear about the advantages of this method and about 0 percent of the industry attended.. Upon information and belief, Defendants infringe, and will continue to infringe, the patent by virtue of the corn oil separation technology in use at their production facility located in Keyes, California. COUNT I (Infringement of U.S. Patent No.,0,) 0. GS CleanTech repeats and realleges paragraphs -, above, as though fully set forth herein.. Defendants infringe and will continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the patent by, among other activities, practicing the claimed methods and/or processes.. Defendants infringement has injured GS CleanTech, and GS CleanTech is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it for such infringement.. Defendants infringement has been willful, deliberate, and objectively reckless.. Defendants infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure GS CleanTech, unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of products or practice of any methods and/or processes that come within the scope of the claims of the patent. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, GS CleanTech respectfully asks this Court to enter judgment against Defendants and against their respective subsidiaries, successors, parents, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, servants and employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, granting the following relief:

Case :-cv-00-ljm-dml Document Filed 0// Page of PageID #: 0 0 A. The entry of judgment in favor of GS CleanTech and against Defendants; B. A preliminary injunction prohibiting further infringement of the patent; C. A permanent injunction prohibiting further infringement of the patent; D. An award of damages adequate to compensate GS CleanTech for the infringement that has occurred, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the inventions of the patent as provided in U.S.C., together with prejudgment interest from the date the infringement began; E. An award to GS CleanTech of all remedies available under U.S.C. ; F. An award to GS CleanTech of all remedies available under U.S.C. ; and G. Such other relief to which GS CleanTech is entitled under law, and any other and further relief that this Court or a jury may deem just and proper. triable. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. (b), GS CleanTech demands a trial by jury on all issues so Dated: August, 0 By /Mark D. Miller/ MARK D. MILLER MARK D. MILLER MARCUS N. DiBUDUO SIERRA IP LAW PC 00 N. Fruit Avenue, Suite 0 Fresno, CA Telephone: () -00 Facsimile: () -00 ANDREW C. RYAN (to be admitted pro hac vice) CANTOR COLBURN LLP 0 Church St., nd Floor Hartford, CT 00 Telephone: (0) - Facsimile: (0) -0 Attorneys for Plaintiff GS CLEANTECH CORPORATION