IH considering counterclaims

Quote from Shane D.

A few other things Rossi may have going for him, is the so far uncontested validation test (VT), Rossi's comment on his JONP dated 8 July 2013, that his "partner" had built an Ecat from scratch, bought and mixed the fuel, fired that beast up, and it ran as advertised.

I strongly suspect that the Validation Test will be challenged.

It's more difficult to challenge than the GPT, because it was so long ago. With the GPT, there is accessory evidence available, we think.

from the Complaint:

Quote

Upon conclusion ofthe Validation Test on or about May 2,2013,the ERV eertihed
that the E-Cat Unit satisfied each of the Validation requirements within the Validation Test period
and IH paid to LEONARDO the second payment of Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) in
accordance with the terms of the License Agreement and amendments thereto.

59. In or around August 2013, the E-Cat Unit was delivered from Fererra,Italy to IH
at its facility in Raleigh, North Carolina, where preparations began for the final Guaranteed
Performance Test.

Display More

8 July 2013 was pretty early, but not impossible. However, was Rossi there, "assisting" with testing?

Quote from frankwtu

So would the court want the (currently locked off) 1MW E-cat tested or a single module under laboratory conditions.

I keep pointing out that U.S. Courts do not operate like that. An attorney may be able to arrange some sort of a test, but what would it prove in this case? Either way?

Quote

So would the court want the (currently locked off) 1MW E-cat tested or a single module under laboratory conditions. This will of course go the same way as the Pons and Fleishmann replications by Caltech since we know Rossi has indicated there is currently no system that does not require his and IH's constant attention. But this being the case, is it reasonable to force him and IH to be absent from a test only he or they can perform, this was not in the contract.

It could be either a single module or a whole plant, depending on what the experts wanted. I think testing a single module is the obvious way to go but could take longer because of the instrumentation and input output requirements. Supposedly the megawatt plant is all set up.

If the system requires constant attention, that is easily solved by having one of the experts put hands on the system and having this expert do whatever Rossi needs done, of course within the bounds of not adding power or fuel.

BTW, what attention could a single module possibly need that a simple automated control system couldn't do? Rossi has never even said how the ecats are controlled. And the original models had a large external band heater than heated only the coolant fluid!

Alan: what successful tests are you thinking of in Sweden? Certainly not Lugano and similar!

C'mon Jed, calm down. It's not that bad a guess. Rossi was in prison and would probably have friends from the time when he was incarcerated. And maybe one was down on his luck and needed a gig. It's not so farfetched. That Rossi bamboozled so many people with his rusty original hardware -- that seemed farfetched.

Hiring an actor would be a typical Rossilike move. What is for sure that I can tell you with certainty is that nobody has ever identified or published an interview with the man and that there is no such thing as a NATO colonel. So I suppose, if he's not an actor or a jailbird, he could be a ghost. I suppose the people who attended the farcical demo of Nov 2011 could have asked but apparently none did. How in the hell did THAT happen?

Where do YOU suppose the guy came from? And who do you suppose is Rossi's military customer who never took delivery (or took delivery of junk) and has never surfaced in six years? And who are all thos exponentially increasing orders from?

Quote from Alan Smith

Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

If it comes to a technical argument over 'does it work' I think that evidence of recent successful tests carried out using Rossi's IP in Sweden would be very relevant. Or perhaps you can (briefly) explain why not?

Remember my outline of the basic issues.
1. Did Rossi transfer the IP? A Swedish test would have no bearing on that.
2. Did the GP Test meet the criteria for payment? All that a successful Swedish test could do is to show that something could work, not that it did.

Quote from frankwtu

Alan

Do you have a link that reviews the recent 'successful' Sweedish tests?

He didn't say there were such tests. He was talking about a speculation that Rossi might present such results, if they were "successful." Read in context.

Sorry, Alan. You're right of course about Lugano. So the Swedish tests are only supposed and not actual? I agree with you that if Rossi can show any working hardware with any customer, he's a long ways towards winning but in my opinion, that has never happened. Why would it happen now? Rossi has never revealed any customer other than IH and the only independent test of the ecats done for Hydrofusion by an independent (really!) Swedish test lab, failed as per this Google translation: http://tinyurl.com/c5k6du3

@frankwtu

I am not the only one who has conjectured that the so-called NATO colonel was a friend of Rossi's or someone he hired. What is the problem with such a conjecture? It's as reasonable as thinking that the guy was a person who worked for NATO with the rank of colonel and never left any trace whatsoever of his Armed Forces association on the internet. Try searching the name of any commander of a military unit (as a colonel would have to be) and see how many mentions he or she gets for such things as commissioning ceremonies, promotions and, especially, new technologies. Try searching “Domenico Fioravanti” and you get a famous swimmer who is not military, anyway not at present, and you get Rossi mentions. Or anyway you used to,. Now, even those are petering out. There could not be a colonel in a NATO army who left no internet footprint whatever and yet showed up in public at a Rossi demo and signed his name to the dirty piece of notebook paper Rossi called The Results of the Test. It does not make sense and it did not make sense in November 2011.

ETA: Try Googling “Domenico Fioravanti” and "NATO colonel" and see what you get.

Jed: who do you think this man is? And why?

Quote from Alan Smith

I think you are wrong. Science and engineering is difficult. Let us assume I run a very expensive class in how to build and ride a unicycle. I have two pupils, one completes the course successfully, he can build and ride. The other can build a unicycle, but he cannot ride it and refuses to pay me. If I were to sue this difficult pupil for my fee, I think the evidence of my other star pupil would be both relevant and useful.

Actually, no. That one pupil was successful would not show that you properly taught the other. At all. It would show that it was possible that *someone* could be taught under some conditions.

What this would show is that you failed to teach the second pupil. You might claim that it wasn't your fault, perhaps he was a lazy SOB, but ... if you are a professional teacher, knowing how to teach -- and not wasting the time of pupils that are not likely to learn -- is part of the job. And if you ran the course on credit, not based on progress payments that are deemed fully earned by agreement, you will suffer the loss, though details will depend on the contract, if there was any.