Law Suit filed against Scent Lok - for Fraud


TRMichels

Recommended Posts

A lawsuit for "Fraud" was filed in a Minnesota Court on September 13,2007, by Theodore Robert Carlson, Mike Buetow, Gary Steven Richardson, Jr., and Joe Rohrbach, against ALS Enterprises Inc. (Scent Lok), and Cabela's Inc., Gander Mountain Company, Bass Pro Shops Inc. and Browning Arms Company, all of which are either licensed by Scent Lok to sell activated carbon clothing, or are actively involved in selling activated carbon clothing. One of the activated clothing company not listed in this law is Robinson Laboritories/Scent Shield. Others includ Gore and Whitewater.

The reason for the law suit was stated as "Diversity-Fraud", which may imply that these companies either knowingly made false advertising claims about activated carbon clothing, or they knew that the clothing could not and did not perform as those companies claimed.

You can view this case by going to and clicking on the "Civil Case" link, then type in "Cabela's" in the "Name" category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scent Lok Patent - Rejected

On 9/13/07 the United States Patent Office posted a "Final Rejection Mailed" notice on their web site for Patent # 90007331, which WAS the "double patented" application of Scent Lok for activated carbon clothing for use while hunting. It is illegal to patent something that has already been patented.

I, along with three other people, have fought hard to get this application over-turned. I did this because I believed these companies were either wrongfully sued by Scent Lok, because their products did not infringe on the "supposed" (now rejected) patent application of Scent Lok, because Scent Lok may have stopped sales of other scent control clothing to stores in some way, and because at least one company did not come out with scent control clothing (because they were afraid of being sued by Scent Lok - even though their product did not contain activated carbon and did not infringe on Scent Lok's non-patent.

What does this "Patent rejection" mean for those companies who have been paying royalties to Scent Lok, or for those companies who have an agreement with Scent Lok, or for those companies who have been bankrupted by Scent Lok for infringing on the now rejected patent application of Scent Lok? It may mean that Scent Lok's demand for royalties for the past 16 years was never enforceable.

The consequences now - who knows? Maybe new technology, with lower clothing prices, for you hunters. It could also lead to law suits ... come back for "soon to be released" updates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to Realtree.com. ;)

Too bad your first few posts are rants about a company, instead of just good ol' hunting.

With that said, ....I deleted your double post, and merged the other 2 posts together, since they are both pertaining to the same subject.

I really don't see the point behind the posts, other than to inform, and possibly bash a company.

This "argument" with scent-Loc belongs in a court of law, and will eventually be sorted out by a court of law, so until then, there's not much use in getting too upset over it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was informational , it is news.

If you want me to post somthing more - such as some of my hunting articles or hunting tips I'll gladly do so. If I get more yes's than no's - I'll post some articles - maybe thecy can help someone.

Yes I was banned from Archey Tal, for simply mentioning "Scent Lok". However, I posted a lot of my articles over there, and made a lot of good friends.

God bless and good hunting,

T.R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest adrenaline_junky

How can they ever prove that a failed hunt was the fault of the garment?

I agree someone probably screwed up really bad and just don't want to admit it, so they blame it on Scent-Lok. I've never personally used scent lok but i know that Scent Blocker works great had a lot of situations where the wind was in the deers face and he just couldn't smell me. It's like i was invisable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The particulars of the law suit aren't public yet.

But, I suspect it has more to do with false advertising as is indicated by the word "Fraud" as the reason for the suit, rather than whether it actually worked or not.

Science says it can't work as they claim. (Read Shivik's Search & Rescue Dog study and the US Govt's findings on re-activation on the internet.)

You can research a lot about the reacitvation of activated carbon on the internet.

May Yahweh-God bLess all of you,

T.R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO you openly admit you came here to bash Scent-Lok and you have an axe to grind. That's brand bashing brother and we don't tolerate it at all here. Zero Brand Bashing Allowed. Go whine to somebody else and either contribute as a friendly forum member or get the heck out. I don't personally care for anyone that comes in here and offers to post His articles and His tips like we are all a bunch of bafoons that have waited all along for your guidance. You came here for one reason and that was to spread hate and dislike for Scent-Lok. My vote is a no since you didn't come here for the reasons listed in the forum sign-up. I speak only for myself and not the others but I'm pretty steamed about what you did. And please stop using God at the end of your posts as if that makes the hatred you spew ok since you and he are so tight. Good Bye!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I just finished browsing through your forums and reading through the topic "Topic: Scent Lok Discussion / Debate " on your forum (which you own).

You seem to be obsessed by this, according to what I've seen in every room in your forums..LOL

We don't allow any member bashing or product bashing on this website.

Your stance against Scent Lok and the legal implications are your problems. You say you are taking them to court ..well, do it, instead of ranting and raving about it on websites.

If what you say, and claim about scent-lok is indeed true, then prove it in a court of law.

You said in one post over on your web-site:

On 9/13/07 The United States Patent Office posted a "Final Rejection Mailed" notice on their web site for Patent # 90007331, which WAS the "double patented" application of Scent Lok for activated carbon clothing for use while hunting.

I, along with three other people have fought hard for three years to get this application over-turned.

What does this mean for those companies who have been paying royalties to Scent Lok, or for those companies who have an agreement with Scent Lok, or for those companies who have been bankrupted by Scent Lok for infringing on the now rejected patent application of Scent Lok?

It may mean that Scent Lok's demand for royalties for the past 16 years was never enforceable.

The consequences for Scent Lok now - who knows?

Justice prevails.

T.R.

So, why aren't you going directly to the companies that have been paying royalties, instead of just talking about it, and getting banned from different forums ?

This discussion is now over in this thread is getting locked.

Realtree.com, is not going to be just another outlet for you to air your Beef with scent-lok.

Take your argument to scent-lok, it's share-holders, the companies paying royalties and to court. This isn't the place for it.

Please don't disrespect the rules on our forum.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.