Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • How did IH violate the agreement?


    And why would he be justified in sending IH's materials to his friends in Sweden? Remember the system was owned by IH Sure sounds like theft to me. Notice he filed before the payment was due they had 5 days after (as I read things) to pay after the report was submitted. Notice the timing is based on the report and not on the operation of the system- otherwise what would prevent Penon from waiting year to give the report. . Rossi sent the materials before Penon's report was even sent to IH.

  • @THH,


    IH would not have built four shiny brand new cars (i.e., the four Big Frankies) ...

    According to the the term sheet (Doc 29 - Exh 17) the 1MW plant was build in Italy:

    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…11/0029.17_Exhibit_17.pdf

    Quote

    Clause 1:

    Industrial Heat llc, directly or through its affiliates, owns a 1 MW E-cat steam plant (the "1MW plant") build by affiliates of Leonardo in Italy in 2013.

    Clause 4:

    IH intends to make available to JMC the 1MW plant for a period of 2 years.


    Btw: Another funny episode of the e-cat soap opera can be found in Doc 214-22 p3 (JTVaughn status update e-mail): http://coldfusioncommunity.net…loads/2017/01/0214.22.pdf

    Quote

    After Rossi finished the 24 hour test in May, he began the process of shipping the 1MW plant to us, with its 105 individual 10kW reactors inside. This took time because the container was non-standard, but arrived at Norfolk on August 1.

    We had some disconcerting moments when customs first required an x-ray test to see what was inside the mysterious box, followed next by a special in-person inspection. But this should not have been suprising, since a Google search of the shipper would reveal they are in business of making some kind of nuclear reactors (at least, "low energy nuclear reactors"). Nothwithstanding the drama, our 1 MW unit successfully cleared customs Wednesday and will arrive in Raleigh Friday, 8/16/13. Rossi was extremely worried during this time because the 105 reactors inside are fueled and operational, so an invasive inspection could reveal their internal design and fuel system. Now that it is over, perhaps we should be glad customs did thorough tests of the reactors, because this is further ratification that they are not radioactive or obviously harmful.

    Maybe the Russian's have stolen the fuel from all e-cats while they were shipped (unsecured) from Italy to US - and that's the reason why the e-cats didn't work anymore when with IH?8)

  • Depends who bought the fuel. We assume it was IH, but don't really know. And I don't suppose for one moment he sent more than a gram or so for analysis, what would be the point of sending more than that?


    But it doesn't really matter if it's a gram or a pico gram, does it? The point of sending it was to get analysis. The point of the analysis was to get an isotopic fingerprint of the ash. But disclosing a fingerprint for analysis to a third party (which is involved in researching this to find out how it works) clearly violates the contractual agreement, which prevents Rossi from disclosing any of his IP to anyone without IH's permission.


    IH paid for and licensed Rossi's IP, and could disclose to whomever they wanted, whereas Rossi needed IH's written permission to disclose to anyone. Per the contract.


    Right?

  • Both government and big business seem to adhere to a different set of ethics than most individuals are held to. I believe that everything that Rossi did, good or bad, was simply trying emulate and play the so-called game by the same rules as IH held itself to. Only as an individual he gets tagged as scammer, fraud, liar, schemer and charlatan, while IH acting through its myriad shell companies is just behaving normally, as any good business would.

    Exactly! Just because certain behaviors are common and therefore predictable does not mean that they are acceptable or judged correct. The fact that it is common for VCs to behave like sharks to pursue their profit ends does not make their attitude justifiable.

  • A key insight in this context is that If IH knew that Rossi's IP worked at the start of the Doral matter and were just trying to give him the short end of the stick, they would have strongly objected to Doral if they thought that it could eventually be construed in retrospect as the GPT, as it would present an 89 million dollar liability which they would have been keen to avoid, since they only hoped to bilk Rossi (by hypothesis). Even if you assign ruthless motives to IH, this is support for the conclusion that they were not confident that Rossi's IP worked at the start of the Doral business.

    I don't think so. I think that IH has always believed in Rossi's technology and that Doral's test has served to raise funds from investors. After all, if you really think they were not confident that Rossi's IP worked at the start of the Doral business, you should agree with me that they have been unfair with investors.

  • Strange question. Rossi removedparts of IH testing sensors and plumbing for the invalid claimed testing and 2year sale of heat to an “independent customer” and even prevented IH agentsfrom entering to check on the testing.It is clear that if it worked as claimed it needed to be done correctlywith proper measurements and run truly independent of Rossi. If he did that I am sure they would bedelighted to pay for such technology. They had commitments for money reallocationif he could do that.

    My question has another meaning. I think IH have deliberately acted in an ambiguous way: since the beginning of the Doral test, they knew that it could be considered legally invalid because of the missing signature but they decided not to say it clearly to Rossi because they wanted to see how the test would end. In case of a positive end, they would have had the answer they were looking for and at that time they could still say that the test was not GPT and therefore not pay for it. They have never intended to pay Rossi, from the beginning they have left him to work just to get a confirmation of its technology.

  • Why trust them with this claimed secret- Because it agreed to technology transfer. He was required to by previous agreements ( that also include future tech that can be use to generate heat)


    An agreement with the Swedes for technology transfer? I do not know what you're talking about.......

  • My question has another meaning. I think IH have deliberately acted in an ambiguous way: since the beginning of the Doral test, they knew that it could be considered legally invalid because of the missing signature but they decided not to say it clearly to Rossi because they wanted to see how the test would end. In case of a positive end, they would have had the answer they were looking for and at that time they could still say that the test was not GPT and therefore not pay for it. They have never intended to pay Rossi, from the beginning they have left him to work just to get a confirmation of its technology.


    SSC - do you really believe this test gives them confirmation, or ever could? It is set up from the start to provide zero information.


    If they want confirmation, and have working reactors, all they have to do is test a few monitoring breakdowns etc. They get better reliability info that way. And no $89M at risk.


    But they have acted in an ambiguous way from the start. What do you expect when they could not know whether or not Rossi's stuff could be got to work? Had Rossi given them IP as promised, and working non-spoofed reactors, they would have been in a different and better place.

  • So many assumptions there...


    In any case, who says they did not first build some small ones which (according to Rossi's test methods) worked?


    You don't think that IH, in two years time, would have ever thought to place a thermocouple on their prototype reactors to back up the thermal camera measurements? You really think that Darden said "yes sir" to Rossi who allegedly said (according to Darden's testimony) not to ever place a thermocouple on the reactor--for two years or more? And that they would not double check their prototype with a thermocouple before building four new shiny complex Big Frankies? Rossi's control over IH is astounding. He must be a hypnotist.

  • According to the the term sheet (Doc 29 - Exh 17) the 1MW plant was build in Italy:

    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…11/0029.17_Exhibit_17.pdf


    We are told that a new 1MW was built using some parts from the original. The shell of the original 1 MW plant was seen in the parking lot. We have heard from Dewey that IH was involved in building the new 1 MW plant, and even built in extra security features to make it difficult to access the fuel/ash.

  • But it doesn't really matter if it's a gram or a pico gram, does it? The point of sending it was to get analysis. The point of the analysis was to get an isotopic fingerprint of the ash. But disclosing a fingerprint for analysis to a third party (which is involved in researching this to find out how it works) clearly violates the contractual agreement, which prevents Rossi from disclosing any of his IP to anyone without IH's permission.


    How do you know that there were not (or are not) pre-existing agreements still in force covering the relationship and flow of IP between Lugano testers. IH and Rossi that allow for the exchange of information and material samples for scientific purposes? The answer to that is of course, that you don't. Nor me, btw, but I'm not shouting about it.

  • Docs. 301, 302 and 303 now on the docket. (Nothing to download for 301.)


    MSJs

    All denied incl 3rd party. My summary of argument "parties clearly disagree about everything, there can be no undisputed facts - it must go to Trial".



    Expert witness exclusion:

    Murray and Smith: allowed, but Murray must submit a proper expert report. (Annesser did not object to Murray in a timely way, so his evidence is allowed in spite of no report at interview, but he must be treated as an expert witness).

    Wong: All statements not allowed except for heat exchanger calculations. These are allowed because Jury is best-placed to judge is Rossi lying, and Wong's testimony can be challenged.


    Comment from me.

    Great that Wong is allowed, his heat exchanger error can be shown. Judge also notes that Wong would have received precise info from Rossi on heat exchanger design, from which he could calculate performance. It is going to be very difficult for him to wiggle out of this one.


    We still, I believe, have the Spoliation issue? If this succeeds the MSJs might be revisited.

  • After all, if you really think they were not confident that Rossi's IP worked at the start of the Doral business, you should agree with me that they have been unfair with investors.


    As has been pointed out before, and which I'll take the time to point out again: (1) IH are only the trustees of the funding that was obtained from Woodford and others. They will have to cough it back up if they have not used it for the purposes for which it was obtained, e.g., if they use it instead for self-enrichment, or for buying real estate in Florida. (2) They are likely to have represented to Woodford and others that this is a promising but high-risk investment. IH need no great confidence in Rossi's tech to do (1) and (2) in good faith, only some level of hope and optimism, accurately represented as such, together with the risks. Indeed, I find it much more likely that they did not convey confidence in Rossi's tech to Woodford and others.

  • Indeed, I find it much more likely that they did not convey confidence in Rossi's tech to Woodford and others.


    There are always risk disclosures in these kinds of deals: always. So yes, IH would have disclosed many risks, especially given that LENR is a nascent field.


    Nevertheless, it remains that Woodford stated in no uncertain terms that Rossi's technology was core to their investment. And the valuation documents that are now on the docket confirm that (as it is split out based on LENR tech, with Rossi's accounting for most of it).

  • But there was an amendment, but yes it wasn't signed by Ampenergo, and yes it appears that Darden attempted to influence Ampernergo. And yes, it is all a big mess.

    Not too much of a mess. An unsigned agreement by itself is not enforceable. Now you may have verbal agreements, but ....

    I have several unsigned agreements from people in my files, but I did not agree with the "agreement" You just need to renegotiate.

  • How do you know that there were not (or are not) pre-existing agreements still in force covering the relationship and flow of IP between Lugano testers. IH and Rossi that allow for the exchange of information and material samples for scientific purposes? The answer to that is of course, that you don't. Nor me, btw, but I'm not shouting about it.


    Yes, you're right, I certainly don't know about any pre-existing agreements. And if IH and Rossi have an agreement with Uppsala, then there should be no problem.


    Dewey seems to think that sending them a sample was breach of contract. Presumably that is because he knows that there is no such agreement.


    But of course, Dewey might not know, or otherwise might be wrong about that.


    My point was simply that Rossi sending them an ash sample, no matter how small, and no matter who thought they 'owned' it, would be conveying important IP information to Uppsala.

  • Not too much of a mess. An unsigned agreement by itself is not enforceable. Now you may have verbal agreements, but ....

    I have several unsigned agreements from people in my files, but I did not agree with the "agreement" You just need to renegotiate.


    One of the biggest legal messes I've ever seen. And even with an unsigned agreement, if the parties move forward and act as if the agreement was in effect, then course of business, estoppel, and all that.

  • My point was simply that Rossi sending them an ash sample, no matter how small, and no matter who thought they 'owned' it, would be conveying important IP information to Uppsala.


    This notion that IH can somehow control the Leonardo IP on a worldwide basis is, in my opinion, laughable. Rossi is free to take the e-Cat to market in the other half of the non-licensed territories, even if IH goes kicking and screaming about it. And to do that, others will be made aware of the fuel and catalysts, as a necessary function of going to market. Besides, it's all a big scam in IH's eyes, so they shouldn't care about the scam fuel being known to the rest of the world.

  • This notion that IH can somehow control the Leonardo IP on a worldwide basis is, in my opinion, laughable. Rossi is free to take the e-Cat to market in the other half of the non-licensed territories, even if IH goes kicking and screaming about it. And to do that, others will be made aware of the fuel and catalysts, as a necessary function of going to market. Besides, it's all a big scam in IH's eyes, so they shouldn't care about the scam fuel being known to the rest of the world.

    Yes, but Rossi should have thought about that before he signed the original NFA style agreement.

  • I'm no lawyer, but I'll ask.


    My understanding of contract law is that when one party originates and does the primary writing for a contract then if there is ambiguity in interpreting the contract that the other party's interpretation is normally held. That is because it is assumed that when someone writes a contract it is to their favor and they would have made sure of issues important to them. My understanding is that the agreement was first from Rossi.


    I haven't heard that point mentioned here. Of that is the case, then all the "uncertainty" of contested interpretation should go to IH's favor. But I again, my knowledge base does not include law.

  • RiRi - interestingly, the Chinese have labeled the US mainstream news and academic elite as the "White Left" and their descriptive details are interesting. Rossi, as an confessed liar, skewers your attempted play but it was a good try none-the-less. It is also somewhat problematic that Rossi's "expert" has basically been taken out of the case and Rossisays will be all that his side gets to present for his side of the story. If IH gets an adverse interpretation ruling for the destroyed / missing evidence then Rossi's odds / chances of success quickly go long.


    Alan - this was intended as a response to a post from RiRi that has magically disappeared - where did you send RiRi's preceding post?

  • My point was simply that Rossi sending them an ash sample, no matter how small, and no matter who thought they 'owned' it, would be conveying important IP information to Uppsala.

    Interesting so apart from the contract and all the legal issues you now say that there would be important information in the ashes.

    This simply means that you think or know that Rossi's technology works because otherwise no information would be contained in the reaction ashes.

    Remember also that the Lugano team had already taken some milligrams of fuel and ashes from the Lugano reactor and analyzed it with the IH approval.

  • That is no way to do scientific research. They made that mistake during their long test at Lugano. They should have consulted with experts at every stage. Heck, they should have consulted with me -- a non-expert.

    You forgot that they (the Uppsala team) are doing their research in an University laboratory. They are all well experienced Academics and also in Uppsala there is plenty of experts in any field they can consult in a confidential way.

    There is no reason why they should consult a person like you.

    Color vs Temperature of transparent material (like glass or alumina) is not such trivial topic as you think.

  • IH are only the trustees of the funding that was obtained from Woodford and others. They will have to cough it back up if they have not used it for the purposes for which it was obtained, e.g., if they use it instead for self-enrichment, or for buying real estate in Florida.

    Interesting point.... Googling around about Woodford and Cherokee. Seems that SEC has done an action against them:


    From page:

    https://www.sec.gov/news/speec…e-equity-enforcement.html


    "Another enforcement action — Cherokee[12] — could best be described as vertical misallocation, as the misallocation occurred between the adviser and the funds it managed. In Cherokee, the Commission charged two private equity fund advisers with improperly allocating their own consulting, legal, and compliance-related expenses to their private equity fund clients in contravention of the funds’ organizational documents. Cherokee ultimately reimbursed the funds for such expenses, and paid a $100,000 penalty."


    The original document they refer to is:


    https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2015/ia-4258.pdf



    And from page :

    http://webcache.googleusercont…ners-reaches-100-000.html


    We learn that:

    "Raleigh real estate entrepreneur Tom Darden's Cherokee Investment Partners has reached a settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commissionover alleged misallocation of legal expenses for three of the funds it manages.

    Cherokee and its subsidiary Cherokee Advisors LLC have agreed to pay the commission $100,000 in fines. The groups have already reimbursed all of the $455,698 in questionable expenses, according to an SEC order issued Nov. 5."


    So a good question would be where are the 250M$ that IH has rised using Rossi technology ? What use they are doing of all that money ?