Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • Peter


    your post above does not help the issue, but some of it could be recast in some form that addresses the issue instead of the personalities:


    Quote

    Dewey who will permitted to return soon at least had a kind of charm and very peculiar sense of humor plus sincerity,

    Abd has a prodigious memory-


    A comment about people but not inflammatory


    Quote

    but Rothwell is simply double distilated illwill and rudeness.

    That is inflammatory - reductionist (no human being can be just their internet persona - even if that summary of Jed's comments here is correct, and of course it is very far from correct). What you might say to express this with more clarity and less inflammatory rhetoric is something like:


    I find Jed's abrasive style of posting here to be rude and at times it creates illwill.


    Quote

    It was very disturbing watching him on the short, abrupt way from commiting character assassination to making character suicide. His character, trustworthiness, credibility and moral image are all dead for now.


    I realise that you have been the subject of similar language, but your view here is partial and would not be agreed by most. You take it upon yourself to judge another's credibility and morality. We all do this sometimes, but it is worth remembering that we may be incorrect in our judgments, and we will likely not speak for others. Better not to make such summary judgments - especially when Jed will feel the same about you and the two opposing views help no-one.



    Quote

    He has old so many dreadfully untrue things (inspired by Murray and Smith) about instruments and measurements

    of the Doral Plant that it is elementary decency to apologize


    You could fairly contest the things that Jed has said. Point by point. In fact I do not agree with all he says. He can seem surer about some issue, on the basis of specific evidence, than I think is warranted. But you do not here contest his specific points in a way that would be helpful. This general comment is unhelpful.


    Quote

    but he has not the slightest intention to do this he respects

    the decalog of the oppressors.

    He is not able to fake intelligence and/or competence so has to throw with horseshit in those who disagree with him.


    That comment is totally out of order. It is insulting, and mostly impossible to prove - other people's intentions are not easy to guess. Calling IH (I guess) the oppressors is cryptic and unhelpful. The rest is insult.


    Quote

    If I think about past- he always was a manipulator- by division fiercely attacking the skeptics and by association he obviously was convinced that by comparing cold fusion with aviation

    historically thinking, cold fusion will start a fast triumphal march. It did not happened.


    That comment is totally out of place on this thread. Maybe it is relevant to some history of LENR thread. Wherever it is difficult because it moves the topic to the life's worth of one of the posters - how can that ever be settled except with grand historical perspective many many years after events.


    Quote

    BTW- what I wrote here are actually compliments.


    If those are your compliments let us hope that no-one ever experiences your insults.

  • Quote

    a) The request

    - can you make a very short summary of the aces (5 or 5?)

    of IH- legal and technical that make their situation so fine? Based on the Court documents, obviously not on what we discuss here. Thanks.

    IH aces:


    • Legally - it is complex but basically the test does not correspond to the GPT in the license agreement - in many ways. Rossi's case is therefore that because IH let him do it, and did not in writing tell him it was not the GPT, it must therefore be taken to be the GPT. That IMHO is very weak. The other issues raised by Rossi do not directly affect the legal question, so are even weaker.
    • Legally - Rossi intentionally deceived them about the customer's identity
    • Legally - Rossi did not follow the required test plan
    • Legally - Rossi removed much evidence that would allow technical matters to be clarified (Spoliation hearing due 20th April - only an ace if IH wins).
    • Legally - Rossi did not deliver to IH the information required to manufacture working e-cats, as promised. Either they do not work as is still claimed by Rossi, or Rossi never delivered the required IP. Both alternatives are a win for IH.


    • Technically - the test could never have generated more than a few 100kW, because of the heat dissipation arguments which are irrefutable. Given that Penon's data requires 1MW to be dissipated, and has low error bars, it must be very wrong. In that case we have no evidence from the test that Rossi's device works.
    • Technically - the quality of data delivered by Penon is far from what would be expected in such a test with various known inconsistencies and lack of independent data collection

    From Court documents Rossi's only technical point comes from Wong. It is an estimate, which is inaccurate by a factor of 20, and therefore does not prove what Rossi claims. I'm happy to go over this with you in detail - it is not very difficult. You may remember a previous post here.



    Quote

    b) The question

    Again if IH is a potential easy winner (i.a. the ERV report is

    already destroyed) then why is necessary to organize the present Rossi character assassination ritual in the frame of a thread dedicated to the Trial?


    IH can win easily without destroying the Penon report. The legal case is only indirectly about that, as you can see from the above points.


    Many people find Rossi's behaviour over this matter, as revealed in documents, to be very bad. It is natural then for them to note previous episodes in Rossi's past and draw analogies.

  • Dear THH,


    Thanks, I understand your point of view.

    Re the legal aspects we will get an indication of what

    the Court thinks on April 20. Anyway, I do not see that IH

    is very much based on or confident in the "it was NOT the GPT" variant, the litigation is in its 13t month and if this is the case perhaps it would had been over without extending it to technical aspects.


    Re the technical aspects if the ERV report is valid then this goes outside/beyond/over the trial, it exists a working LENR technology and this is of paramount importance.

    However thank you for the sincere answer.

    Best,

    peter

  • the litigation is in its 13t month and if this is the case perhaps it would had been over

    I think that there may be a misunderstanding about how the court proceeds on this, however, I am not a law expert so others may correct this.


    The law has a very formal process.. Lawsuit filed, a time then given for response / answers by defendants. Then another time allotted for the plaintiff to answer the defendants. This takes time, usually some number of months. If the judge does not find clear legal reasons to dismiss the case entirely, then the process moves on to the next phase, called discovery.


    Rossi had 4 of his 8 counts dismissed by the judge almost immediately. This is a bit unusual and indicates that Rossi's legal team / case is not the best laid out.


    The discovery period last much longer, as it is when both sides call witnesses for depositions, gather material facts and wrangle about legal proceedings. This often takes several months as well. The discovery phase has just completed and now the judge will reconsider motions to dismiss, from both sides.


    What we have seen is that the judge is extremely unlikely to grant Rossi's motion to dismiss IH's counter suit. The judge has even shown some frustration to Rossi's lawyers for pushing weak legal issues that have already been ruled on. Rossi has provided almost zero technical evidence and actually destroyed physical evidence. Not a good sign.


    IH's motion to dismiss is likely, both from a legal prospect, (no signed agreement, fraudulent actions by Rossi and gross technical issues with the measurements). Right now, the next step is for the court to consider the spoliation issue. I.E. the court will consider if Rossi did indeed "spoiled" the lawsuit by destroying physical evidence. If the court decides in IH's favor on this, the case is basically over. This is because even if Rossi wins on the legal issues (unlikely) the measurement data will all be considered "spoiled" and therefore Rossi cannot sue as it being the "GPT". I believe this very likely to happen. It is absolutely clear that Rossi dismantled the entire setup, starting the night the test was over! Why would he have done this? It is very damning to his case.


    So the length of time, is not excessive for a case like this and bears no impact on the outcome. It is normal. The legal issues and destroying of evidence (both equipment and data) is probably insurmountable for Rossi.


    why is necessary to organize the present Rossi character assassination


    First, there is no "organized" character assassination. No more so than there is an "organized" group supporting Rossi. This is a blog where individuals review the evidence known (and some evidence only existing in their minds!) and form an opinion on 1) The lawsuit 2) Rossi himself 3) to some extent LENR itself.


    I see no problems with people voicing their opinions on the lawsuit. It is what many read this blog for!


    Rossi himself, is bringing most of the criticism's here. He has proven not only to have lied in the past, but he has been proven to grossly lie during the Doral event! (Fake customer, fake production, fake chief engineer, fake ownership, etc.) Not only that, but he continues to lie with the QuarkX! He announces on JONP new partner, new customer, new factory, while his "under oath" depositions have stated there is no new partner, no new customer and no new factory!


    These are not character assassinations! It is the truth! When a person acts fraudulently, people calling that out is not bad and I support it! Do you not?


    I would ask you:


    1) Is it OK for Rossi to lie about customers and partners? Should this be ignored and viewed as if it was not true or not happening?

    2) Is it OK for Rossi to continue lies about tests (Quarkx test with new customer) and continue the same format he has done in the past?

    3) Is it OK for Rossi to continue to dodge a true, validation test for his technology while presenting diversions such as "safety certifications" and "Sigma 5"

    and a "under cover 1 year GPT" that had serious components that were completely fake!


    So there are no organized character assassinations going on. They are brought about by Rossi himself!


    Again, I repeat:

    If Rossi wants money, all he has to do is allow a true validation test by a reputable and independent party. (Not Penon) He will have billions.

    If Rossi wants respect and acknowledgement, all he has to do is allow a true validation test! He will be regarded among Edison and Tesla.

    If Rossi wants to help the poor and the planet, all he has to do is allow a true validation test! He will be regarded "a saint".


    What does he do? HE, ROSSI, filed the lawsuit. He, Rossi, does not allow proper testing, He, Rossi, continues to lie and divert.

    I ask you why does he do this?

    I believe the answer is obvious.

  • more legal issues -

    Legal - the burden of proof is Rossi's not IH. He has delivered very little factual and physically supported evidence much less a preponderance.

    :Legal - the jurisdiction since there is still some question about the Leonardo corps being correct. Merger claimed but poorly documented and with different officers in different states.

    Legal - failure to get all three parties to sign and agree to start of testing.

    Legal - The ERV did not take the data but only took what was sent him by Rossi when the agreement specified that the ERV was to measure......

    Legal - the agreement specified that the flow out of the device was to be measured and not the flow into the device. With out access to customer's side there is only an assumption that it was a closed loop and Rossi has destroyed/removed the evidence. Any uncertainty must be viewed to the benefit of the defendant.

    Legal - The agreement specified that IH had the right to view and access the device but Rossi barred Murray's access.

    • Official Post

    IH's primary work focused on intellectual property development and on developing business partnerships. IH wanted to acquire other technology rights and to find deployment partners that can implement. IH had visited two large technology-based manufacturing businesses to discuss limited, research-based licenses. IH had, without Rossi, traded drafts of an agreement with one company and granted access to IH's (Leonardos) LENR technology both theoretically and through testing, without granting rights to the technology, or very limited rights, granting access for a created limited internal group with restricted access to information, to get their data and engineering work, where either of the contractors can stop the process at any time. They had have contact to several of Rossi's former licensees from outside the IH licenses geographic territory, that are seeing IH as an aggregator of LENR technologies and a friendly supporter. IH's long term goal was to gather these technologies and researchers and get the technology out to others who can implement and do further research and IH wanted to see LENR technologies developed by larger, more sophisticated companies, other than Rossi's Leonardo Corp.


  • I *think* that is where the new documents fit in. But IH refers to other documents by name, not by number ... eg from 256

    Quote

    IH ... hereby oppose Third-Party Defendants’ Statement of

    Undisputed Material Facts in support of their Combined Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
    [D.E. 204] as follows:

    ...


    But DE 204 appears to be a different document under seal.


    Edit : by my count there are now 704 documents in the docket!

  • The "closed windows" discussion is hitting someone's nerves.

    From JONP:

    Damn, the Google street-view car apparently just drove by when Rossi closed the window for a moment ^^

  • Anyone whining that they are not allowed to post on another person's website really needs to get a life.


    Or perhaps they really do relish their own 'martyrdom', and feel the need to broadcast it, as suggested above.


    Each to their own, I guess.


    Still, it's an improvement on the several pages of debate about who can/can't see a transparent object.

  • So there are about four people here who have determined with their unique world view that the e-cat works and there is nothing that could possibly happen that will change their minds. These people will take their e-cat love to their graves, even IHFanboy, who is completely neutral on the subject and only seeks truth (har!) Despite the fact that this is glaringly obvious to any interested observer, everyone else here has spent nearly 6000 posts trying to show this handful of people the error in their ways. It is hard to decide which behavior is more eccentric.

    • Official Post

    The "closed windows" discussion is hitting someone's nerves.

    From JONP:

    Damn, the Google street-view car apparently just drove by when Rossi closed the window for a moment


    One of Rossi's best sockpuppet comments yet! So funny. We always knew he read these blogs to cue in on what he may have missed, and this one pretty much proves it. Pretty sure also, the blogs are where he learned that he needed to come up with a better way to get rid of all that heat....hence the upstairs heat exchanger came to be.

  • Doc. 257 and its attachment now on the docket (courtesy of Abd).

    257 is a request from the Rossi camp for a two week extension.

    257-1 is the proposed order for the above.


    Among the reasons given for the requested delay are:


    IH "intentionally" gave insufficient deposition from IPH.


    It is now a religious holiday season with Passover and Easter.


    Rossi recently has had throat surgery.


    I do not know if this will be granted, but it looks like we might have to wait a bit longer. :(

  • Interesting that they had 10 months on this and now asking for an extension. Easter and Passover have been on the calendar for a long long time. It should not have surprised them

  • The stuff they need more time to file is all trial-related.

    But there is still a bunch of stuff in progress which could radically change that ... The (AR) unfair practices and (IH) spoilation motions for the magistrate judge, and all the Motions for Summary Judgement, which could knock out whole sections of complaints even if it goes to trial.