Do you have a properly written report of any of the experiments (say one of the "killer result" ones)?
Of course I'd agree that this is a better bet than Rossi - but then that bar is so low it means nothing.
It is little things, like not knowing what was the background level of counts, and no having a control (which would greatly reduce the possibility of some other effect triggering the counter) that just can't be estimated from raw results.
I agree the results are impressive, and were there proper evidence for them I would be all over it. One reason for not putting much store in patent descriptions is there is, as well as lack of detail, too much conflict of interest.
For the particle count results (not understanding much, and not having a clear writeup) I'd suggest the following. (Probably completely wrong). Evidence of extraordinary high fusion counts comes from:
(1) particle count
(2) ion energy
I suggest that the high particle counts might be direct capture of protons and/or ionised He. These would be low energy, true, but the ion energy measurement is obscure to me, and I notice the phrase "maximum ion energy" which could apply to a very small subset of the ions from background etc - you'd expect some fusion with this setup. I'm unwilling to look at this patent description in great detail because I know most of my questions will not be answered and it is quite a lot of work to deal with the ones that can be answered, from such a limited write up as here.
If you reckon these people are sane, you could look at whether what is happening is consistent with the apparent claims. Fusion is the holy grail and an unconventional fusion approach with clear evidence would attract massive funding from industry. For some money, or a place in an existing lab, all you need is an interesting unusual claim and one person convinced (no SME) with patents like this as evidence. It is not evidence, of course, but it works as remarkably good PR.
For significant development and >1e7 dollars you normally need better evidence, e.g. a write-up of the evidence that could be properly checked by an SME under NDA. This would not necessarily be public. But the significant development money would be obvious. Unfortunately this is not a great tell, we all know very large amounts of money spent by industry on completely hare-brained projects, and no-one aware of this at the time because the whole is wrapped in secrecy.
Tom