Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Defendants Amended Counterclaims against Plaintiffs and Memorandum of Law

Quote from randombit0

THHuxley wrote:

Oh guys what a wonderful high tech language ! What a wonderful word to put on Scrabble !
It's really a shame that's not even a word !

There is nothing eccentric, apart writing in this forum, nor unphysical ( ʌnˈfɪzɪk(ə)l/ adjective ), in my explanations.

This is classic pedantic trolling. Randombit0 obviously knows how to read the word and, yes, it means "unphysical." It's a word, I've encountered it many times. It has simply not penetrated the dictionaries, but it is in actual use, so it will, eventually. This is not a game of Scrabble, which uses a standard dictionary to determine what is a word or not, though Rossi has long attempted to make it so.

Perhaps Randombit0 will care to comment on the preposterous claims of Rossi about "kWh/h" -- which is not "incorrect" in itself, merely an unusual usage -- and Rossi's claim that reducing the unit to simply kW is "stupidity," even though the source Rossi refers people to for knowledge about the physics, Wolfson, makes that "stupid" claim, explicitly, even though this is basic physics which any elementary student of physics would know, and the same would also know, off the top of their heads, that 1 kWh is not equal to 3526 kilojoules, as Rossi claims.

Rather, since a joule is a watt-second, the conversion ratio is the number of seconds in an hour.

Meanwhile, Rossi v. Darden is on fire and Planet Rossi is fiddling furiously about anything else. A week ago Jones Day filed a Motion for Judgment, and Rossi responded yesterday. He is giving arguments that might succeed in avoiding dismissal, if the judge does not notice the requirement for a writing signed by all parties to set the date for the Guaranteed Performance Test or to make other changes, but that will fail miserably at trial, at the same time complaining that IH is raising the legal costs. Pot Kettle Black.

Case files on newvortex, as usual.

Quote from andrea.s

But Rossi has fascinated so many people that he will likely charm the jury members as well.

His expectation that he may do that would be why he requested a jury trial. However, the obstacles he faces are many, and not terribly complicated, and even if he manages to charm the jury and the judge, there will then be an appeals court, which will be quite unimpressed.

1. Estoppel on the date of the test (i.e., the Second Amendment) was reasonable and would survive an appeal.
2. Estoppel on the lack of written agreement to a test date will not.
3. Statute of frauds disallows Rossi's claim of Cherokee backing of the payment.
4. The "Whole agreement" clause of the Agreement bars that same claim.
5. A claim of fraud which has no factual basis other than nonpayment of an alleged debt, and an alleged verbal representation four years ago, not reduced to writing and contrary to the actual written agreement, is not allowed. This would not survive appeal.
6. The evidence that the Doral test was a Guaranteed Performance Test appears to be entirely Rossi Says. Rossi implies that this was said to IH, but does not actually state that. Rather Rossi sets up circumstantial evidence that looks like it implies that, the strongest being the assertion that Darden approved the "test protocol" for the GPT. No document has been entered into evidence on this, IH denies it, and Rossi has not responded with a reply to the Answer, only motions to strike or to dismiss *other parts of the Answer."

(Darden likely approved a "measurement protocol," but not for a GPT, rather for monitoring power in an installation for the sale of power and for demonstration purposes, which is how the Doral plant move was sold.)

7. It seems quite possible that Penon will not appear to testify to the "ERV Report." If not, there goes Rossi's claim about it. There is, then, quite a sound legal reason for IH to not release that report. It could be considered admission.
8. The issue of heating of the warehouse by a megawatt will be examined by experts. It's hard to hide a megawatt, and why would one even try? However, that is exactly what Rossi appears to have done by setting up the phony customer, i.e., to hide the power application. This would never have been allowed in a GPT on which a payment of $89 million was to be determined. but a sale of power would be easily allowed. "No sweat, Andrea, you have the approval of that customer, not a problem for us! The plant is useless to us, but if your customer is willing to pay, why should we complain?"
9. I could make up a reason, as Annesser makes up reasons, and Annesser thinks that all "logical possibilities" are equally probable. He has a point, but there is the matter of "reasonable." Making up a reason would then allow me to claim "10 Reasons why filing Rossi v. Darden was stupid, Rossi shooting himself in the foot."
10. If Rossi clears the bar on all these hurdles, IH declares bankruptcy and Rossi gets no money. The $50 million from Woodford, whatever portion of it has not been spent, is safe in IH Holdings International, Ltd, and that was probably deliberate. Rossi's attempt to pierce the corporate veil, here, would never pass muster in an appeal, it barely survived a Motion to Dismiss based on a false interpretation of the Complaint. It would create chaos in law regarding LLCs.

Quote from randombit0

I'm not writing about sports and supporters here but about Science.
Eventually in Court there will not be my avatar, but me, with other experts. And at that time would be clear WHO is trying to poison the Jury.

This is Randombit0 admitting being Rossi, quite clearly. It was already quite clear, but this nails it, if any doubt was left. This is truly useful information, we are seeing Rossi arguing in a forum that he does not control. We are seeing that he uses at least one sock puppet, and we also strongly suspect true sock puppets on his blog.

By the way, an ordinary fraud would not do this. This is more evidence that Rossi is insane. People tempted to rely on what he says would be well advised to keep this in mind. People who are insane are often right about this or that, and one of the techniques of dealing with insanity is to assume that the person is honestly saying what they believe. Calling an insane person a "liar" is never productive.

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

Calling an insane person a "liar" is never productive.

But you're still a liar tho : /

Quote from Forty-Two

Don't want to call this an evidence for an investment, however what is behind this private placement?
(Noted by Bloomberg, Dec 31. 2013):
http://www.cobraf.com/showimag…mmagini/R_123546037_1.jpg

I don't know. What is critical in Rossi v. Darden was the claim that Industrial Heat is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cherokee. Industrial Heat is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of IH Holdings International, Ltd, so the present issue boils down to who owns IHHI. There are "mystery shareholders," including, by the way, the Woodford shareholders (there are two trusts involved) but we can identify them by the share assignements, at the same time, totalling exactly $50 million. This was shortly after IHHI was organized.

There is a shareholder called an IH Nominee, as I recall, substantial, but by no means even a majority shareholder.

The Cherokee page about their CEO, Tom Darden, shows him as having "personally invested" in a series of companies, including Industrial Heat.

The page linked is an information page, but no URL is given for it, it is just an image on cobraf. Searching for it, I find many pages with misinformation based on internet researchers seeing something and presenting their conclusions as fact, which then get quoted by others. I could not find the page on cobraf that would presumably link to it. While I do not immediately go to a "forged" hypothesis, without attribution, this is on the table. It is also entirely possible that something existed, that was an error, that has been taken down or that is not accessible to the public (in which case it might be an error or not).

So.... the image has some sort of section for displaying scraped information. The page format does appear to be from Bloomberg.com. See http://www.bloomberg.com/resea…hot.asp?privcapId=1441004

This is the current Bloomberg page: http://www.bloomberg.com/resea…shot.asp?privcapId=127890

It does not show data more than a year old. That report was dated in early 2014. Bloomberg attributes the information to "Capital IQ."

The date of December 31, 2013, would probably the date of some report that appeared somewhere. The meaning of this is obscure. In late, 2012, $1.5 million was paid to Rossi to secure the Agreement. The first share sale was a few days before the $10 million payment was due, that raised about $11.5 million -- enough to pay back the $1.5 million, wherever it came from plus the $10 million, and then there was an allowed continued share sale with no further notice to raise a total of $20 million.

The most likely source of the $1.5 million funding (probably considered a loan) was from Darden personally. However, it is not impossible that Cherokee loaned IH the money. That could trigger some kind of report of a "private placement." Of a loan.

There is no sign that as of the formation of IHHI, there was any Cherokee ownership, that I've noticed.

This image was mentioned on ecatnews, April 5 of this year, citing the image from cobraf and attributing the information to Bloomberg, but that image is not from Bloomberg, probably. It was likely some site scraping from Bloomberg. Or ... it is private only for Bloomberg subscribers. Most opinionators are not cautious about sources, and the blogosphere becomes a vast network of unverified and unverifable rumor.

I am sure that Rossi's counsel would be filing an interrogatory on Cherokee ownership of IH, and vice-versa, that IH would be asking Rossi for evidence that Cherokee is "sole owner" of IH (which does appear to be blatantly contradictory to the record).

Quote

BTW: In the docket there is now a another response in Opposition re43

Yes. I checked the docket last night and found the filing and put it on newvortex. It's document 44. It is not yet on pacermonitor, which is often delayed over the weekend. Pacermonitor did not check for updates all day yesterday; this was filed late in the day.

Quote from bang99

It's Mrs. Rossi's avatar, I guess.

No, it's Rossi's avatar, here. Randombit0 has clearly acknowledged being Rossi. This is unmistakeable: Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Defendants Amended Counterclaims against Plaintiffs and Memorandum of Law <--link -- I don't know why this goes to the bottom of the page. The actual post is by randombit0 above the bottom.

So I'm taking this opportunity to welcome Andrea Rossi to lenr-forum.com. Now that I'm sure about the identity, I intend to read posts by this user with heightened interest. I've already read back and it's enlightening. Thanks, Andrea, for sharing your reality with us.

Quote from bang99

IMHO: Style of writing does not match. Grammar and typos does not match. Randombit and Andrea Rossi does not match.

Ah, so much we imagine that we can discern reality so easily!

Once upon a time I would load many, many examples and analyze thoroughly various behavioral patterns. I did this, to some extent, on Wikipedia. In the end it doesn't matter, and it is not worth that effort. If randombit0 is not Rossi, it does not reflect badly on Rossi, obviously, and if he is, it does not reflect badly on Rossi more than Rossi already reflects badly on Rossi. Randombit0 actually engages here, even though it tends to be rather one-way, fingers stuffed in ears. But lots of people do that. I find randombit0 far more interesting as Rossi than as some random troll pretending to be Rossi by presenting thoroughly-Rossi-soaked arguments. I looked back over RB0's contributions. Again and again, very clearly "Rossi argument." But presented with somewhat more sophistication, I do recognize a difference. I suspect that here, RB0 feels more free than on JONP. And, of course, there is plausible deniability here. "That wasn't me!"

I am always wondering if communication is possible. Rossi on JONP has excoriated me and others -- old friends -- as "paid puppets." He just criticized a comment I'd made, a rather off-hand comment, and it was presented in a completely distorted fashion by "another," -- Rossi sock? There was no citation of the comment, and, basically, I had not said what Rossi was reacting to. But he then showed signs that he'd read what I'd written. So how is it that on JONP Rossi goes ballistic over something that didn't happen?

Will this happen here? I don't know. This environment is uneven. I am now blocking a few users (something that I have very rarely done in the past). I'm finding that it provides me with reduced temptation to waste time responding to insane, repetitive fluff. Information filtering. Amazing thing, necessary in our time. There are bypasses if someone really has something to say.

It drives trolls crazy. Sane people don't care. Or will ask to be unblocked. Trolls will use it as proof you are ... something Bad.

Quote from bang99

A magificance or a masterpiece? IMHO: Ramdombit is not A. Rossi. .
Abd might post another 4 pager about this issue.

Aw, the two photographs were taken many years apart.

Now, not to disappoint bang99: here is some more.

A little story from Brad Blanton, the Radical Honesty guy.

https://radicalhonesty.com/201…t-over-shit-and-be-happy/

Quote

A woman, in a job interview, was asked by her potential boss, “What do you consider to be your biggest fault?”

She answered, “Honesty.”

He said, “I don’t think honesty is a fault!”

She said, “I don’t give a fuck what you think!”

Display More