Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxleynew

    The points above are not facts.

    Quote

    "Our primary work now focuses on intellectual property development and on developing business partnerships. We want to acquire other technology rights and to find deployment partners that can implement. We want to see LENR technologies developed by larger, more sophisticated companies. We have visited two large technology-based manufacturing businesses to discuss limited, research-based licenses. We have traded drafts of such an agreement with one, and it appears they will sign something acceptable to us. Under the discussed terms, they will assess our technology both theoretically and through testing. They will have no rights to the technology, or very limited rights, and they will have to create a limited internal group with restricted access to information. That group will not share their knowledge or work on other LENR projects. IH will get their data and engineering work. Either of us can stop the process at any time. We have been contacted by several of Rossi's unhappy licensees from outside our geographic territory. We generally have avoided such conversations. But this is happening because people see us as an aggregator of LENR technologies and a friendly supporter, which is consistent with reality and helpful to us. Our long term goal is to gather these technologies and researchers and get the technology out to others who can implement and do further research." (Thomas Darden)


    https://thenewfire.files.wordp…nd_3_exhibits.pdf#page=17

    Rends


    Would you care to extract the part of your post supported by that quote from the rest? I'd agree with it then...


    I think you can support:

    And there is Cherokee Investment Partners, Thomas Darden et.al., who by all means try to get the entire IP of LENR Technology world-wide under their control with an impenetrable network of sham companies, where they do not even know themselves, witch management position they have inside this companies.


    And directly contradicting the implication you make, from your own quote:


    Our long term goal is to gather these technologies and researchers and get the technology out to others who can implement and do further research." (Thomas Darden)

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxleynew

    And directly contradicting the implication you make, from your own quote:


    Our long term goal is to gather these technologies and researchers and get the technology out to others who can implement and do further research." (Thomas Darden)

    Quote

    "They will have no rights to the technology, or very limited rights, and they will have to create a limited internal group with restricted access to information. That group will not share their knowledge or work on other LENR projects. IH will get their data and engineering work."(Thomas Darden)


    That is the strategy of Cherokee Investment Partners and it is all about Cherokee Investment Partners, when Thomas Darden acts it is for Cherokee Investment Partners even if they build up dozens of mocking companies structures in US and overseas (which he himself loses the overview), to hide it:



    ...and for an owner of such a big investment company is there a lot of "I don't remember" in this deposition!


    https://thenewfire.files.wordp…_1_to_42_ocr.pdf#page=199

    Quote from Rends


    That is the strategy of Cherokee Investment Partners and it is all about Cherokee Investment Partners, when Thomas Darden acts it is for Cherokee Investment Partners even if they build up dozens of mocking companies structures in US and overseas (which he himself loses the overview), to hide it:



    ...and for an owner of such a big investment company is there a lot of "I don't remember" in this deposition!


    https://thenewfire.files.wordp…_1_to_42_ocr.pdf#page=199


    Rends


    if you read your quote carefully:


    (1) Nowhere does it mention Cherokee. The conflation of IH with Cherokee is something you have not justified.


    (2) Darden here is talking about how he will use external research companies as a service to validate the LENR technology. This is what most people on the blog have been asking Rossi to do. Darden says it is possible to do this without compromising the IP (obviously if you provide a collaborating LENR inventor's secrets to an external company you need to do so under conditions where their secrets stay secret).


    Read it again and you will understand. How could Darden ever hope to get LENR inventors as partners without this protection? And how could he find out whether LENR partners claims are real or not without the involvement of serious external research companies?

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxleynew

    if you read your quote carefully:


    I would advice you to read the court papers carefully:


    Quote

    Q.· ·By whom are you currently employed?

    A.· ·I work for Cherokee Investment Partners. I also work on behalf of a number of the different venture deals that we've invested in.

    https://thenewfire.files.wordp…_1_to_42_ocr.pdf#page=203


    One of these Investment is IH or better the mocking parade (Industrial Heat LLC, IPH International BV, IPHBV Holdings, IH Holdings International) "It's a complicated structure" (Thomas Darden)


    Quote

    Q.· ·Do you have several e-mail addresses?

    A.· ·Yes.

    Q.· ·Can you please provide those.

    A.· ·Tdarden@industrialheatco, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected].


    So if you as an owner of an investment company are working for your own investment what do you call it?

    Could you define mocking parade?


    I accept that Darden works for both Cherokee and IH, and that Cherokee have invested in IH. As have Woodward.


    Would you like to answer my point about external research companies? Without such restrictions, how could IH validate LENR technology? It is far from what you interpret, and sort of necessary for anyone except Rossi who does not validate technology.

    Their belief in Rossi is akin to religion.

    bachcole, Bernie, Swatman, engineer 48 and many others lined up taking shots at me and my concerns for years.

    Labeled a "skeptopath" by all, I continued to ask them questions that were NEVER once answered, but always "shouted down" with derision. Funny how now, they're almost non existent in the fervent protestations of anything anti Rossi.

    Frank has been relatively accommodating to me as an obvious non believer, so I continue to post there.

    LENR, maybe, possibly, hopefully,

    But I believe Rossi is a lying, delusional, quack and he will not produce an Energy Out > Energy In device in my lifetime.

    • Official Post

    Rends,


    Someone had to eventually partner up with Rossi for his tech to go anywhere. As far as we can gather, before the IH partnership, he had no office, no warehouse, no lab, only one employee (the handyman). His corporate office was his Miami Beach condo where he first met Darden. His official website was, and still is hosted...not by him, but by HydroFusion -his one remaining loyal partner. We also know now from testimony, that before IH came along, he never had a single customer, never had a DD done for a potential customer, has nothing going on now, and nothing planned for the future. It is safe to say that before IH came along, he was going nowhere, content making up stories on his JONP.


    Most would, and do, give them (IH) credit for doing what many others refused to do...buy his 1MW, enter an agreement with him considering his checkered past, do so knowing he had more suitable investment partners available in the energy industry, yet chose them...a real estate venture firm, and still offer him $100 million if he were to prove that his tech worked.


    But instead of giving credit where due, those like you revile them for doing something that had to be done, that few others were willing to risk. Very confusing.

    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    The IH lawyers were there on the 17th of Feb, 2016 and the water meter was involved in some sort of dispute on that day and finally photographed.

    The Plant was padlocked shut.

    So I am sure that Rossi knew there was trouble brewing long before the ERV report was finalized.

    Spoliation before suit. The Florida laws are not clear if such action would be spoliation but remember that the case was brought in Federal court.

    There: A legal duty exists to preserve evidence over which a party has control and reasonably knows or can reasonably foresee is material to a potential or pending legal dispute. Where the time the duty to preserve arises may be ambiguous, particularly prior to a complaint being filed, the duty to preserve relevant information attaches at the time litigation is “reasonably anticipated.”4 In Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC (Zubulake IV)


    I think that it is clear that Rossi reasonably foresaw that there would be a pending legal issue.

    It sure sounds like spoliation on a federal case to me.

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Could you define mocking parade?


    Formation of a company braid to for pretending of size and cover-up of responsibilities.


    Quote from THHuxleynew

    I accept that Darden works for both Cherokee and IH, and that Cherokee have invested in IH. As have Woodward.


    This is quibbling!


    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Would you like to answer my point about external research companies? Without such restrictions, how could IH validate LENR technology? It is far from what you interpret, and sort of necessary for anyone except Rossi who does not validate technology.


    The plant was, so to speak, in its possession, on Cherokees land in Raleigh North Carolina. Why did they do not perform a long-term test there, as foreseen in the agreement with Rossi and instead try to develop other devices, that are of no value to Rossi, but only for Darden et.al. (see above, how they tread other partners)?


    Because they have not found a customer? Ridiculous!


    Darden et al. did not want to pay the 89 million, that is the only reason. They had it long time in their hands to test the plant under self-chosen scientific criteria, with self-chosen experts, extensively according to the agreements and have not done it.


    Rossi's test in Florida is, of course, not a clean thing in the sense of a proper business deal, but under the given circumstances, at least an explicable organizational act that is even not denied by Rossi in his deposition in court.
    But here we have to separate precisely, between the business on the one hand side and the test results of the plant and the evaluations and the report of Penon on the other. To say that the report must be faulty, or even preposterous, is not the solution, because with the means available to us from the outside, we simply do not have the possibility to produce evidence and therefore it is all but a presumption.

    Quote from joshg

    I don't think this is correct. Rossi's initial complaint was filed on April 5, 2016. The test finished up in late February, and he has testified that he dismantled the heat exchanger soon after the test was completed. So he had a little over a month to dismantle the exchanger before IH failed to pay and well over a month before the lawsuit was filed. You could make an argument that dismantling without documenting its existence was stupid, but I don't think you can say it was destruction of evidence since there was no legal filing at that point. It has been obvious to me from the beginning that this spoliation claim has no legs. As for the destruction of data, I'm not so sure. My sense is that the spoliation claims will be rejected, and the case will proceed to trial.

    Thank you for the correction, you are indeed right.


    My mind was thinking lawsuit when it was actually the payment date. Rossi filed the lawsuit before the payment was due, by a few days.


    However, it was clear that there was major issues before the equipment was removed. Depositions state this and it appears the lawyers were talking to each other since Dec. 2015.


    So that is indeed a big difference. I am not sure what the legal ramifications would be. As you state, possibly not wise, but perhaps not illegal. It will be interesting to see how this turns out. What may backfire on Rossi, is that he stated he repurposed the equipment, pipes, etc. for other uses, and I believe he stated specifically in the Doral facility. However, it appears there is nothing in the Doral facility now except the black box and the 1MW plant container. Where is all the "repurposed" equipment?


    It may fall back to the "intentional" part. It may also fall back on to who owned the equipment. Rossi can lay claim to the mysterious heat exchanger, but can he to the flow meter, steam traps, etc.? They appear to have been IH's. Removing them would be even more questionable. Also, the data was contractually required to be returned to IH, at least by Fabiani and I believe Penon. Has that data ever been recovered? My understanding was that it was not. Only the summary reports by Penon and Fabiani.


    It seems clear that there was an intentional dismantling of almost everything outside the 1MW plant. It does not appear that anything of the components are still in Doral. Rossi has not shown any photos or evidence of what he used it for. Simply more "Rossi says".


    It is indeed a big question on how the court will rule on this. If the court rules spoliation, then case over. If not, it may go to trial.


    ----------------------

    Edit: Here is a letter from Rossi's attorney dated Dec. 2015. I think there is no doubt but that legal proceedings had started well in advance of the equipment removal. This letter specifically claims that Rossi considered the Doral event the GPT. So does a lawsuit have to be filed before spoliation can be considered or does simply the start of legal matters involving lawyers "start the clock ticking"? Anyone have more education on this that can add to the discussion?


    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…7/01/252-01-Exhibit-A.pdf


    (Thanks ABD for the handy court document resource!)

    Edited once, last by Bob ().

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    . . . we have so much information released that Rossi's claims are provably false technically.


    All you've got is your heat exchanger conjecture based on vague statements from expert Wong. That's it. The rest of your IH-must-be-right conjecture has been explained with one or more alternative possibilities.

    Quote from Rends

    All this was anticipated by Rossi and together with his lawyers and so they staged this fake event with JM-Products, to give Rossi the possibility to fulfill the contractual obligations, ie the long-term test, because Rossi could have waited for ever that Cherokee Investment Partner presented him the promised own customer and thus he would never have been able to fulfill the contract.


    I've had that same thought but had hitherto not put it down into words. Thanks for airing it. I'm pretty confident based on the information we have that that was the purpose behind JMP.

    Quote from Rends


    Quote

    Formation of a company braid to for pretending of size and cover-up of responsibilities.


    I agree that IH has this complex corporate structure. Umm... ever heard of Google, Amazon? Structures like this are used globally and routinely to reduce tax. Personally, I think it should be banned. But it is not and everyone does it. So, that is a clear reason for the corporate complexity. Cover up responsibilities and size? I can't see anything being covered up. Nor does it seem likely to me that Cherokee has invested more in IH than Woodward. How do you expect a VC company investing in LENR to behave? Suddenly be different from all other VCs?


    Quote

    The plant was, so to speak, in its possession, on Cherokees land in Raleigh North Carolina. Why did they do not perform a long-term test there, as foreseen in the agreement with Rossi and instead try to develop other devices, that are of no value to Rossi, but only for Darden et.al. (see above, how they tread other partners)?


    Very simply, from the Court documents, you will note that Rossi has not transferred the IP to IH. Actually he can't because his devices don't work, but it is all the same.Until that happens there is absolutely no point having a long-tern test. Getting just one reactor to work in IH hands comes first. And rightly so.


    Quote

    Darden et al. did not want to pay the 89 million, that is the only reason.


    See above. Note also from Court documents. They were willing to pay $89M, able to do this (Woodward) but only if Rossi could show he actually had working product. Which would, under the already agreed contract , be worth much more than $89M to them.


    Quote

    Rossi's test in Florida is, of course, not a clean thing in the sense of a proper business deal, but under the given circumstances, at least an explicable organizational act that is even not denied by Rossi in his deposition in court.


    Yes. It is explicable. Rossi desperately (he used that word in his deposition evidence) wanted to get his hands on $89M up front instead of helping IH get his reactors to work as he had contracted. Could that possibly be because he realised that they would not work? What do you think explains his actions?

    Quote


    But here we have to separate precisely, between the business on the one hand side and the test results of the plant and the evaluations and the report of Penon on the other. To say that the report must be faulty, or even preposterous, is not the solution, because with the means available to us from the outside, we simply do not have the possibility to produce evidence and therefore it is all but a presumption.


    You could look at the Court evidence on how the test was conducted, ask why this was not independent of Rossi, and why Rossi tries so hard to prevent IH experts from validating the test?


    Or you could do the check everyone else has done (even ECW) on how Rossi's fictitious heat exchnager, which he under oath seems to have found it necessary to propose to explain where the 1MW went, could not dissipate more than a few 100kW?

    • Official Post

    The heat exchanger story is a good example, as the IH expert Rick A. Smith has shown in his report by means of photographs, there was this serpentine heat exchanger, just as Rossi has described it to Wong. What sense should the installation of this heat exchanger make, if the Ecat plant does not work? Because according to the agreements between IH and JM Products, no IH personal would have been allowed to take a look into the black box. This heat exchanger makes sense only if heat is actually produced, if this was all a fake, this installation would have been completely unnecessary.

    https://thenewfire.files.wordp…_1_to_15_ocr.pdf#page=136

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    [Rossi foresaw there would be a legal issue]


    Yet the IH supporters here say that IH was shocked when the lawsuit was filed. That Darden never would have imagined that Rossi would sue.


    Of course. Rossi was the one who brought this (obviously stupid) action. IH just did not realise he would be so stupid. Abd on another site has this theory that maybe Rossi was not well advised by Annesser - whose initial letter to IH was very hostile. Or maybe Rossi just did not listen to legal advice. That would be par for the course. I don't know, but either way Rossi was the one who did it, and presumably he would have worked out he was going to do it at least from the time the relationship broke down.


    I'll give you one thing. IH were naive, and did not fully realise what an unpleasant and irrational business partner Rossi would be. Or else Darden could imagine Rossi would sue but reckoned (rightly) that they would certainly win if Rossi was so foolish. Take your choice.

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    All you've got is your heat exchanger conjecture based on vague statements from expert Wong. That's it. The rest of your IH-must-be-right conjecture has been explained with one or more alternative possibilities.


    Sorry - let me get this right. Rossi's only expert witness, and you are saying his statements are vague?


    I'm a bit surprised you would think Wong's report, given under oath, should not be read seriously. It says something for the weakness, technically, of Rossi's position when his only expert Witness has to be viewed as unreliable to construct a plausible story for Rossi.


    In any case we have the same information from Rossi, also under oath.

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxleynew

    that Cherokee has invested more in IH than Woodward


    That is not the question, the question is, does Darden act on behalf of Cherokee Investment Partners, or on behalf of Industrial Heat LLC, IPH International BV, IPHBV Holdings, IH Holdings International (what so ever) at the time he was negotiating with Rossi, so the question is with whom Rossi spoke, with the representative of Cherokee Investment Partners or someone else and whether one can separate it at all?

    Addition: and if you have a look at the email headers, than there is no separation by Darden himself, he uses his Cherokee mail account for IH communication and vice versa.

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.