Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • I don't get the idea that somehow a sale of heat takes it outside of the domain of a GPT. The ERV was making quarterly reports. IH was making visits and approving of it along the way. A final report was generated by the ERV. I kind of doubt that the judge/jury will go along with this notion that it wasn't the GPT. But it definitely isn't a slam dunk--for either side.




    Rossi and IH (and possibly AEG) did need to agree on a start date as stipulated in the second amendment to the licence.



    In Rossi's complaint, #65 says:




    IH denied #65.


    I haven't seen a Rossi response to that denial.

  • MrSelfSustain, even if what you said is true, I would still argue that AR is getting into dangerous territory here. The common defense line so far has been that AR is holding key details back, or he is keeping certain things a secret. If I were his attorney (and I'm glad I'm not) I would suggest that he provide some real evidence right now to show that this was not all set up as a way to defraud Darden for millions of dollars.


    AR may not see it this way, his followers may not see it that way, and IH may have no interest in pursuing criminal charges against AR. But with a complete lack of evidence provided by AR so far to support any of his claims, well that could get the attention of someone in the Florida State Attorney's office who is looking to pursue a nice criminal case like this to bolster their resume. The people in that office have access to all of the same documents that we do here.


    While this is not a high profile case, there was real money involved and "cold fusion fraud trial" may get in the newspapers. If anyone is wondering what constitutes criminal fraud in the state of FL, just read below and you can decide how much fire AR is playing with right now:


    http://law.justia.com/codes/fl…005/TitleXLVI/ch0817.html

  • The supposed bombshell in 93 falls flat when I read it. I can think of a number of explanations that square with what we already knew. The parent company might have divested of JMP prior to the disclosure. Rossi might have been told by someone from JMP that it had a parent company, when it really never did. The parent company conjecture might have been a figment of the community's imagination. Rossi might have exaggerated. MrSelfSustain pointed out some of these above.


    Dewey once again calls the whole thing over and done with based on this one disclosure. When there are real bombshells, there won't be any question in anyone's mind that it is a bombshell. And no doubt, they are coming.

  • They are bombshells alright and you don't even know the half if it (yet). Bagdad Bob could do a better job for Planet Rossi than these clowns.
    Rossi better produce some supporting discovery soon - his idea of holding out until he can get in front of the jury has clocked out - a strategy that has rotted from the head down.

  • Quote

    The supposed bombshell in 93 falls flat when I read it. I can think of a number of explanations that square with what we already knew. The parent company might have divested of JMP prior to the disclosure. Rossi might have been told by someone from JMP that it had a parent company, when it really never did. The parent company conjecture might have been a figment of the community's imagination. Rossi might have exaggerated. MrSelfSustain pointed out some of these above.


    Dewey once again calls the whole thing over and done with based on this one disclosure. When there are real bombshells, there won't be any question in anyone's mind that it is a bombshell. And no doubt, they are coming.


    You are right there are other possibilities. But the idea of a parent company was not a figment of the imagination. Andrea Rossi had previously bragged on the JONP of how the customer was based in the UK/Europe and had manufacturing plants across Europe. Although we cannot be 100% certain (there is a 1% chance that a split of some kind could have occurred since then) we now know that Rossi was very likely exaggerating to a tremendous irresponsible extent as to the nature of the customer. Also, it seems highly likely the document in the original license agreement which indicated that JM Products Inc. was owned by an entity in the UK was untruthful. IH also claims that Rossi and/or his lawyer told them in person that JM Products Inc. was a secret subsidiary of Johnson Matthey. They went so far as to submit a statement of energy used with the header including the oddly spelled word, "Johnson Matthew."


    Basically, I'm all but convinced JM Products Inc. was never a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey. However, just because JM Products Inc. was never owned by Johnson Matthey, doesn't mean some other relationship between the two didn't exist. It could had been as simple as a supply agreement in which platinum or other powders were sent to them in the mail, processed to some extent, and shipped back. There are a number of different possibilities.


    Regardless how the case ends up, we have only read or seen a fraction of a percent of the evidence from both sides. I really hope more evidence is presented. I want IH and Rossi to start presenting more evidence so we can get to the absolute truth of the situation. But like someone said, for the most part only points of law are being debated now, so we might not see a lot of evidence until the trial -- unless the case is dismissed.

  • Quote

    I guess the indication of the 3 TB of data is much more interesting.


    This sounds like IH is ready to release some or all of them if demanded by the curt.


    I sure wish both sides would hurry up. But Andrea Rossi's obviously wanting to withhold whatever evidence he has, and Industrial Heat (if they truly have the totally damning evidence certain unofficial representatives have at least alluded to) don't seem to be in a hurry to fully expose Andrea Rossi's lies and shenanigans with their hard evidence. The community and world would be better served if both sides decided to start swinging. Because after it is all said and done -- regardless of the outcome -- this huge distraction from replication of the Rossi Effect could end.

    • Official Post

    "cold fusion fraud trial" may get in the newspapers.



    This is the kind of headline that I'm afraid of.


    If IH is really like their pretend ( I think so) and want to develop LENR energy, it may be smart ;) (cc @Dewey Weaver ) to take advantage of the tribune to leak :rolleyes: some good data about successful (lab) experiments, to compare with the TB of failure they claims against e-cat.

  • They are bombshells alright and you don't even know the half if it (yet). Bagdad Bob could do a better job for Planet Rossi than these clowns.
    Rossi better produce some supporting discovery soon - his idea of holding out until he can get in front of the jury has clocked out - a strategy that has rotted from the head down.


    That's not how you do it. Look: iraqiinformationminister.jpg


    In a strange twist of fate, it applies to your post! That said, 3TB of data is interesting... but I guess it doesn't cover the heat exchanges in the other room? oh wait, there never were any, the information minister said so.


    What about the ERV that Cherokee/IH don't have? ah, but Penon and half-a-dozen other people are in on the scam. It all makes sense!

  • Quote

    This is the kind of headline that I'm afraid of.


    If IH is really like their pretend ( I think so) and want to develop LENR energy, it may be smart (cc Dewey Weaver ) to take advantage of the tribune to leak some good data about successful (lab) experiments, to compare with the TB of failure they claims against e-cat.


    I am not afraid of such headlines at all. In fact, that might be what it takes (or for the jury trial to start in the current litigation) for Andrea Rossi to present more information about the various incarnations of his technology. And, perhaps, that would inspire replicators to stop reading forum posts, get back to work in their labs, and use the information that is currently available to reproduce the Rossi Effect. If we can produce self sustaining devices that operate at high temperatures for hours at a time (between reinvigorations) newspaper headlines won't be enough to deter this technology from becoming headline news. When hundreds of replicators post their results on YouTube, no amount of negative publicity will stop LENR from destroying the current "renewable" industry and ushering the next age of human civilization.

  • Basically, I'm all but convinced JM Products Inc. was never a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey.


    I never thought it was. The header on the request for invoice never stated that. Rossi always denied that it was. My guess is that JMC had a parent company from the UK at the time of entering into the license agreement, and things have since changed.

  • Whatever else you think, it is clear that the calorimetry (all under Rossi's control) would not be proper for any test of performance with $89M riding on the result. Regardless of what any contract said. There are rules about fairness etc and obeying the spirit of the agreement . . .


    Of course that is the moral case. The legal case is simpler - this was not the GPT.


    The quality of the test would also be a legal case. It is never good enough to satisfy a narrow definition of a contract on paper only, without actually performing the work correctly. I have enough experience in business to know that is not how contracts work. There are implicit guarantees in any contract, product or service. For example, if you hire a licensed plumber to install a new sink, and the plumbing leaks or the sink is installed incorrectly, you can demand your money back or demand the work be done over. Even if you paid and signed a receipt that includes your agreement that the job was done, if you find out it was not done right, you have an automatic recourse to demand it be fixed. The trade laws override any agreement. All regulators and agencies enforce that. It has happened to me and to companies I work for many times. The plumber cannot point to the receipt and say "I don't have fix anything."


    In the other direction, a customer who pays and signs off on a contract cannot come back later and demand the work be done over for no reason. Just being dissatisfied or deciding you don't want it after all doesn't count.


    In this case, we are talking about a heater. As I have pointed out, methods of measuring heat are defined by the regulations in Florida, which are based on ASME standards. It is abundantly clear that Rossi's work did not meet these regulations. Any qualified engineer will testify to that. Any engineer who testifies otherwise would be committing perjury, and would run the risk of losing his license. There is no way Rossi can charge for services rendered when the regulations prove he did not render any services.

  • Let me add that you are not allowed to use cute legal tricks or dodges to circumvent trade laws. You cannot say: "We agreed beforehand that Mr. Penon would adjudicate the results and decide whether the contract is fulfilled. He says it is fulfilled, so you have to pay $89 million." It never works that way. If, by conventional engineering standards and regulatory standards, it is clear the work was not done correctly, and it does not meet code, then you don't have to pay. It makes no difference what the contract says or what Mr. Penon comes up with.


    If this were a complex scientific experiment, or something like a project in artificial intelligence where standards have not yet been developed, the results might be debatable. In that hypothetical situation Rossi might argue that the test was done correctly. However, this is a very simple claim which can be tested by methods that go back to 1880, when the ASME was founded for the very purposes this test is supposed to meet -- to codify and regulate boiler testing and safety standards. This is no more complicated that a test to prove that an automobile prototype can go at 60 mph for 1 hour. There is no doubt that Rossi's test was a farce that did not meet code, his data was crudely faked, the instruments could not possibly show what he claimed, and if the claims were true the observers would be dead.

  • It is also true that if you find that the ERV was paid "on the side", you might be able to show that they were part of a conspiracy to overthrow the agreement.


    For example it is still very unsettling about the apparent previous independent testing where Univ. records show Fulvio Fabiani paid Levi $75k for "pinball consulting work" from 2013 to 2015. Things like that may be enough to rise grave questions about the independence and objectivity of someone doing the testing, especially when the ERV goes into hiding to avoid questioning.


    If it is found that Penon received more money from Rossi than that from IH then he violated the agreement which held that IH and Rossi would pay him 50/50.

    • Official Post

    Univ. records show Fulvio Fabiani paid Levi $75k for "pinball consulting work" from 2013 to 2015.


    As you say, this was duly recorded as an official payment to Bologna University, taxed and deposited in the Uni's bank a/c. It was never touched by Levi personally but was donated to a software engineering course that he supervises. The money was to pay for 2 postgraduate students to study and develop software systems for pinball machines and pinball machine simulators. There was nothing underhand or secret about any of it, his name was mentioned as recipient since he is head of the appropriate course.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Want To Advertise or Sponsor Us?
CLICK HERE to contact us.