Member Info for Bananaman2

I can only assume that it will be documentation that supports EQTs defence in the motion to dismiss. Documents that prove the prior art gasifiers existed prior to Aries application for patents. It will also include perhaps sensitive data and material which they did not wish to share with Aries for obvious reasons.

The court can then decide that the case is either dismissed on the basis of prior art or the patents held by EQT and their gasifiers do not actually infringe on Aries gasifiers because they are more advanced and superior.

A motion to dismiss has to be supported by some evidence. They obviously did negotiate, but as Stokey said did not agree possibly because EQT did not want to share all the sensitive materials. Who would?

Yep. And that will be positive for EQT as Aries do not have a case. Why would they want to risk providing sensitive information to Aries regarding their gasifiers. Its plain to see that EQT had installed gasifiers at Moviasla prior to the so called Aries patents had even reached application.

This is all natural progression. You seem to put a negative slant on this.

bandi. I agree, as do most. I think the motion to dismiss is standard proceedings. I also believe Aries can be fined for wasting court and dependent time if they decide to withdraw.

I can imagine that once they had seen all the evidence and discussed with Phoenix and EQT that Aries realised that EQT either had 'prior art gasifiers meaning they predate the perhaps invalid Aries patents or the EQT equipment is significantly different and does not infringe their so called patents. Either way, this has been discussed and EQT are just getting on with things.

I would assume that once the discussion was made the next logical process is to file a motion to dismiss by the dependent rather than Aries withdraw the claim.

I am not sure why Stokey puts a negative slant on it.

I think Stokey states their is no mention of costs perhaps this has been agreed to be paid outside of court and Aries will be covering EQT and Phoenix costs as any counter claim would be much more painful to Aries.

I agree. Filing a motion to dismiss would say that Aries have no case. They have no legal claim and EQT have proven this. Rather than defend the claim the defends simply request the dismiss or in simple terms - throw out of court.

https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/when-can-a-motion-to-dismiss-be-filed.html

Opportunistic claim with Aries complete chancers.

meggiesdad. I agree, its far too political and opinions vary too much for reasoned debate. Not getting drawn in.

Back to AFC, Green tech and the hydrogen revolution for me.

Can't see them using diesel generators can you ? Not really sending out the right message. Maybe grid power but they won't be using that on race day. It would be ideal to start testing all equipment not just the EVs.

Its all the brexit BS. I said to my wife this morning that we love a good drama in the UK and all this talk of a no deal will drivevthe markets down. Not sure really how it affects EQT or the green sector but I am sure it is just BS.

EQT don't need subsidies and will certainly perform much better than incineration when it comes to emissions. I can see advanced gasification being a solution to a number of waste issues. Any manufacturer which has waste could install a suitable sized gasification plant and deal with their own waste and generate their own energy. Not so good for EQT as they may not then be the owner and collect gate fees but still good for them in respect of construction revenues and ops and maintenance contracts. The opportunities ar endless.

Two completely different business strategies. EQT will benefit from design, planning and construction revenue, operations and maintenance and energy sales whereas PHE licence the equipment.

Different processes. EQT have many feedstocks. PHEs DMG process turns waste non recyclable plastic and tyres to syngas and ultimately hydrogen.

Not really competing but can operate in a similar space.

Klunk, I don't suppose Taskmaster is far off. A simple Google search will give you the basic values required to produce hydrogen and the energy stored in hydrogen. Perhaps they do need 40 odd panels to do the job, generating power for two weeks to provide enough hydrogen for one day's racing, but we're missing the point. The point being that AFC have consulted with Extreme E and asked to design a bespoke system that generates completely green hydrogen using renewable energy, which provides an effective store of energy to power the EVs for race day.

Now once that solar system is paid and installed it can be used anywhere to generate hydrogen for free. Office and factory roof tops for example. Used to power and electrolyser fed with water will generate Hydrogen at minimal cost, which can be used as a store of energy to utilise in a fuel cell for rapid charging. Solar on its own is perhaps not enough for rapid charging unless you have a solar farm of many many panels. Now this is not to say that this would be the only requirement for hydrogen of any business with an EV fleet but it certainly demonstrates the feasibility of the system and can easily be applied with an ammonia cracker to give a plentiful energy store and delivery system with the low cost hydrogen making up 10, 20% of the fuel requirements and thus reducing the hydrogen bill.

And thats what its all about ! a simple demonstration of what is possible and AFC have developed the bespoke system. The rest is irrelevant as long as AFC and Extreme E are happy.

Anything suggested before year end or all 2021 now ?

Yes. Agree. Talk of 10 and 20 baggers shouldn't excite me (should know better) but it does. Of all my investments I think EQT has possibly the best chance and biggest upside over the next 6, 12 and 24 months.

It wasn't long ago that a 10m trade was not that significant. Now its a 6 figure sum. Some holders on here have 10s of millions of these. Lets hope they do well out of this and hold out for the big payday. I love a success storey especially when I am also rewarded.

They have claimed to have bought on EQT. Which is fair enough. I guess it is difficult to buy in if you can see a SP has doubled in the last month. It should not stop an investor doing their own research.

Monocrystaline silicon PVs (traditional solar type cell) vs thin film. Its horse for courses. Each has its merits but efficiency is not one of thin films but I can only assume that its getting better.

Graphene Integrated Solar Photovoltaic Cells (GISPV) will perhaps be the most efficient and the UK may be hearing about success in this area shortly. Anything greater than 25% efficiency is considered to be very good. There is a strong chance that GISPVs may breach 30%

Thin film is not silicon PV

Taskmaster, thats why they will be collecting hydrogen for at least a week before race day.

No I haven't 'crunched the numbers' I am not that intelligent. I will leave that to the experts. I am sure between AFC and Ex E they will get it right.

Thin film is low cost and lower efficiency. With the limited space just on the roof a different type of solar would be better. It may be twice the price but there isn't that much to worry about.

However, if you look at the pictures of the 10ft container system with the MSP kit next to it the solar panels are not thin film, they are SPV. 3 standard panels will provide roughly 800w

Bore off

I advise you to find the thread on the Aries claim started around end of August. There may be some dross in there but plenty of detail around 'prior art' and how EQT can either prove this as the case if the tech is infringing (basically EQT sold equipment first) or if its not prior art the equipment is not similar and therefore not an infringement.

Either way, EQT are getting on with business and have repeatedly stated its opportunistic and its easy enough to see why.