From the proposed 4th Amended Answer, this seems to be new (latter half of 142.)
...
This is also new:
...
So maybe Bass is also back in the suit, if the court agrees that he did have an important part (if the Court allows the FDUTPA claim to be reinstated).
Nice catch finding these additions. It does seem like Bass may have some jeopardy. But it also seems like a tepid response if IH was really trying to go after Bass. It will be interesting to see how the court rules on IH's request.
No, what I am coming to understand is that your habit of doubling down on your ignorance still is not helping your cause.
I recommend the "block user" feature for users whose behavior is annoying, intentionally or otherwise. (But please feel free to continue correcting misstatements if you prefer.)
57. Defendants admit that from April 30 to May 1, 2013, Penon conducted measurements in connection with the Validation test of certain E-Cat reactors operated by Plaintiffs. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 57. The Validation test did not follow the Validation protocol as set forth in the License Agreement and the First Amendment (the “Validation Protocol”). For example, the Validation Protocol required 30 E- Cat reactors to be operated as a unit (“Unit A”) for twenty-four consecutive hours. However, only 18 E-Cat reactors were operated as Unit A during the testing period. In addition, the Validation Protocol required the flow of heated fluid from the E-Cat reactors to be measured during the Validation test. However, these measurements were not taken during the Validation test. Furthermore, the Validation Protocol required that twenty-four consecutive hours of testing be done on Unit A. However, less than twenty-four consecutive hours of testing was done on Unit A. There are various other examples of the Validation Protocol not being followed during the Validation test.
The rest can be read in the following (..58..) paragraphs where IH confesses that they have been fooled...
I guess, that after reading this, you understand something more about business and how it should not be done... Paying for an invalid test...
The distinction here is that between an invalid test not following agreed protocols and IH's decision to pay for the IP. They did this, and as a result have their own (valid) analysis of Rossi reactor and technology performance. Whether it was wise for them to pay this money must surely be a judgement call and for the reasons stated here many times IH could reasonably - both because of the possible value in this technology, and because "the Rossi effect" while rumoured but not substantiated was inhibiting other LENR investment - pay even knowing that Rossi behaved badly and the test was flakey.
There is then a legal point of whether, having made the validation payment, the performance during the 1 year test is moot. Without being a lawyer, the license agreement says that payment is contingent on test performance. Also, we know that if Rossi's case holds up that far (which seems unlikely) it will be on the basis of reasonable intent not literal reading of the contract. Reasonable intent here is surely that the $89M is, as IH state, a bonus payment available for technology so advanced it can be commercialised in short order. Hence we need the thing to work, not just be stated as working from fake figures generated by Rossi and published by an absent ERV.
Worth noting that as a side effect of such a genuine successful test, it would be trivial for IH to leverage further money from Woodford or others.
Worth noting that, even knowing the test is not the GPT, a successful test with a genuine customer would be highly interesting to IH because difficult to spoof and therefore proper validation given secure input measurement - which surely the electricity supplier could provide. That if it were real IH would (very possibly) pay Rossi to keep him sweet and quiet while gearing up for a disruptive commercial effort. Can't say I'm sure about this: but it could be justified.
For the life of me I cannot see where in all this IH has shown evil intent, or managerial stupidity. If you sup with the devil, you need a long spoon. Perhaps IH's spoon was in retrospect not quite long enough - but that again is a judgement call. IH look like they will get what they want from this matter, which is to discover whether or not the Rossi effect is real. That, for people who put money into chasing LENR, must be their first objective.
Personally I'd argue that not having a better analysis of the Lugano/Levi Al2O3 thermographic calorimetry at the start was a scientific lack but we can all say such things with hindsight.
No, what I am coming to understand is that your habit of doubling down on your ignorance still is not helping your cause.
sigmoidal: It seems that you are tightly involved into the case and your writing is driven by obvious animosity.
For me the story is over because the picture - of a headless acting, greedy investor doing everything (tax evasion, dubious test contract, ..) much better, than verifying the grade of his investment - now is complete.
The only thing we can hope for is, that IH hires (not just contracts.., but this would be more expensive..) some crack, who really understands LENR. If they can't change their attitude they will compromise the whole Ni-H-LENR field, with just pouring in at lot of money and issuing gag orders to formerly independent researchers...
Any prolongation of the trial is just driven by the same emotions, as you seem to feel...
...writing is driven by obvious animosity.
For me the story is over because the picture - of a headless acting, greedy investor doing everything (tax evasion, dubious test contract, ..) much better, than verifying the grade of his investment - now is complete.
Well, at least I can agree with you that "the story is over" in terms of anything particularly useful information regarding Ni-H-LENR coming out of this case. However, showing that Rossi is a con man (and likely delusional) has some utility, though purchased at a high price!
I also agree, in hindsight, that IH could/should have done better due diligence regarding Rossi and his claims.
My animosity is reserved for your often baseless comments presented as facts.
For example, there is no evidence that IH has engaged in tax evasion, yet you like to repeat that.
As you appear in this response to be sincere in your opinion, I apologize if my comments have been overly reactive. But please, do try to keep up. And it might help to preface your opinions with phrases like "In my opinion...".
When Rossi says, on JNOP, to pay no attention to this round of exhibits and wait until the end of the trail then you know you need to pay attention. I'm surprised that 124-06 (Exhibit 5), a letter from Joe Murray to Penon, has not gotten some attention from this crew this weekend.
I'm surprised that 124-06 (Exhibit 5), a letter from Joe Murray to Penon, has not gotten some attention from this crew this weekend.
Exhibit 5 is the same as it has been since it first appeared in the docket in August. What more attention can we give it?
We already dragged out the operator manual for the meter, the guaranteed performance flow limit certification sheet , the specifications, designs, and operation mechanics of the counter wheels and impeller, and even some great photos of what it looks like.
Is there something more we should discuss about the meter?
Or is the number of reactors on, off, unplugged, not used, and their arrangement within the red container that is the attention-deserving point?
Or perhaps the DN40 piping, requiring supersonic steam transit if some aspects of the "reactor" are to be believed, or the 8 cm per minute of water flow in the DN80 water return pipe?
Cheers,
Para
I'm surprised that 124-06 (Exhibit 5), a letter from Joe Murray to Penon, has not gotten some attention from this crew this weekend.
As Paradigmnoia wrote, Exhibit 5 is not new. It was already included in the first answer from IH, and therefore the major issues have been discussed long time ago.
E.g. that it is not feasible to drive the 1398 kg/h steam @0 barg through a minimum 6m long pipeline with DN40 (40mm) diameter.
Everyone can easily check that with this calculator:
http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/c…-loss-through-piping.html
That fact is just ignored by Rossi supporter, and it is useless to discuss this again and again.
But I think in Exhibit A at page 63
https://drive.google.com/file/…19-wyX25RQi1WQmF1SzQ/view
there is some interesting new information:
"In connection with the instant litigation – and after the Plant ceased operating – Counter-Plaintiffs obtained electrical power data from Florida Power and Light (“FPL”) for the Doral Location where the Plant was operated. The FPL records show that often more power was being used at the Doral Location than being reported by USQL for the Plant, but sometimes less power was being used at the entire Doral Location than being reported by Fabiani and USQL just for the Plant."
Unfortunately the FPL records are not included in the docket files.
It would be good to have them, because I suspect that there was never significantly more el power consumed for the entire Doral site than the el. power for the 1MW plant - which would be another indication that there couldn't have been any real production at the JMP area of the Doral site.
Thanks for the calculator link. I actually forget if the water was calculated to be moving at 8 cm per minute or second down the return pipe...
I would like to note that the Penon specifications sheet listed a pressure sender model that reports in Absolute pressure, and also for good measure is not rated for the steam temperature.
(We have no idea what actual model was installed, although there are possibly photos in the hands of IH et al).
Para - my bad. I didn't realize that the letter was previously posted as an exhibit.
No problem. I took the ball you tossed and ran with it anyway...
Indeed you did and thank you!
Ignoring the heat, the neighbors would have heard this plant for blocks around if it was running as advertised.
Picture perfect vacuums. Identically perfect daily fluid flow volumes. Supersonic steam flow at less than 55db. What an amazing machine it was.
Dewey,
How can you not have known that Exhibit 5 has been in the docket since August? Jed brings up Exhibit 5 in about every other post. Murray has been the topic of discussion for months and months. This whole situation is like twlightzone kind of stuff.
IHFB - no excuse but do find all the hysterics from P.R. last year to be very interesting in light of that amount of information that was disclosed before the court.
Planet Rossi somehow still manages to hang on in what must be a desperate kind of hope. You are surely warned and must be prepared for the the additional facts and truth that will be emerging in the coming weeks months. Rossi is finished.
If the ECat technology doesn't work, Industrial Heat shouldn't issue another patents around it and he should return the license back to Rossi (AmpEnergo company).
But IH doesn't wants to do it despite the offer of Andrea Rossi - it wants to embrace this technology despite it doesn't work. In addition, as MrSelfSustain also noted,
we have multiple indicia, that A. Rossi has working technology in hands.
So we still have problem here - the similar controversy, like with Pat Corbett, who just wants the know-how of McCarthy from Steorn, despite it allegedly doesn't work.
If the ECat technology doesn't work, Industrial Heat shouldn't issue another patents around it and he should return the license back to Rossi (AmpEnergo company).
But IH doesn't wants to do it despite the offer of Andrea Rossi - it wants to embrace this technology despite it doesn't work. In addition, as MrSelfSustain also noted,
we have multiple indicia, that A. Rossi has working technology in hands.
So we still have problem here - the similar controversy, like with Pat Corbett, who just wants the know-how of McCarthy from Steorn, despite it allegedly doesn't work.
We do not know if IH would return the license to Rossi if Rossi was willing to return the money he received. We only have Rossi say on this. If everything Rossi say is to be considered the truth then of course the e-cat works. The aleged offer from Rossi is not confirmed in any way. And I think you are biased to continue to repeat it after it has been pointed out to you that it is unconfirmed.
Rossi is finished.
That has been said before of course.
If the ECat technology doesn't work, Industrial Heat shouldn't issue another patents around it and he should return the license back to Rossi (AmpEnergo company).
But IH doesn't wants to do it despite the offer of Andrea Rossi - it wants to embrace this technology despite it doesn't work. In addition, as MrSelfSustain also noted,
we have multiple indicia, that A. Rossi has working technology in hands.
So we still have problem here - the similar controversy, like with Pat Corbett, who just wants the know-how of McCarthy from Steorn, despite it allegedly doesn't work.
You do not know which claim Dameron was involved with. Remember that IH had the rights to patent improvements, and a patent can be filled if only one claim was invented by the co-inventor. Perhaps Dameron had input to one claim that might be useful in some of the other research IH is involved with.
Rossi has not offered to buy the IH license back but is welcome to do so at full price including $1.5M for the 1MW container and all legal expenses incurred by IH to date.
