Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • Of course anything can happen in a court of law, but if there there is to be any justice, IH certainly doesn't have to prove that the e-cat never worked.


    NO, In the USA it is the plaintiff that must prove the defendant guilty. The defendant doesn't not have to prove his innocence.

    Also IH has sued Rossi: among its reasons is the alleged non-functioning of the Doral Plant. In this case is Rossi the defendant who does not have to prove his innocence .

  • Not sure about that. Do you have a reference? I seem to recall that they did set up the six cylinder device (the one required by the agreement ) and started testing but Rossi could not transfer to IH for the technology to work in NC. The work in FL was after that and not part of the GPT.

    I had already provided a reference ......... I repeat:

    From 254: "It is undisputed that Defendant IH owned, controlled, and could have started testing the 1MW Plant at that or any time. See id. Yet Defendants prevented Plaintiffs from commencing the Guaranteed Performance Test in 2013 and 2014 by representing to Plaintiffs on numerous occasions that the parties needed authorization from a North Carolina Health Department but were unable to obtain such authorization. See SOFO ¶ 24. It was not until June of 2014 that Defendants received clearance from their nuclear radiation compliance consultant. See id. When, in June 2014, Plaintiffs brought to Defendants’ attention that Defendants had not – since 2013 – indicated where to install and operate the 1MW Plant, Defendant Darden responded that “ideally we would not make a decision about this new location for a while longer” and that the “decision [could] wait a while.” See id. Significantly, Defendants fail to identify a single written request made to Plaintiffs demanding that the GPT begin, or that Plaintiffs’ failure to timely assist in the commencement of the test amounted to a breach of the License Agreement or the expiration of the time for performance. As the delay in the test was caused by Defendants, they cannot now claim that Plaintiffs failed to timely perform as a result."

  • But all IH has to do is to say that * they * never saw it work. And that they were unable to make it work despite diligence in trying.

    In this case, they should also justify the email and internal communications in which they claimed to have had good results from their Ecat test, with COPs greater than 1 !

  • Quote

    IHFB - so you think this trial is going to be about determining whether LENR works or not?

    Why would it be? What does that have to do with the case brought by Rossi? It's about whether the ecat works if anything but it may turn out to bear minimally on even that.


    One thing for sure about trials: they are extremely unpredictable. And the decisions often make no sense, especially in matters of technology. In this case, one can hope that Jones Day does a decent job and chooses credible experts for all the huge fees they are known to charge. But the outcome is always in doubt in a trial and maybe even more so in a jury trial which is why Rossi demanded one. If the decision is a bad one (favoring Rossi) then you can bet there will be an appeal.


    Quote

    Also IH has sued Rossi: among its reasons is the alleged non-functioning of the Doral Plant. In this case is Rossi the defendant who does not have to prove his innocence .

    Civil trials are not about guilt or innocence. The allegation is that Rossi defaulted on his promise of performance in a contract for which he received an initial $10+ million. To prevail, Rossi has to prove either that he did, in fact, perform or that the reason for non-performance of the contract (if Rossi admits that) lies with IH -- for example, that they did not follow instructions. Courts tend to rely on expert opinion, not having the expertise on their own to decide technical issues. I am not a lawyer so my language above may be imprecise but I have participated in law suits so I know a bit about them. They are extremely tedious, burdensome, and expensive, whether you win or lose. And sometimes in a civil action, the reason for the decision seems absurd and at best extremely technical about things like the law, arbitrary limitations on what evidence can be presented, the parties' "standing" (demonstration of sufficient connection to the case), and so on.


    So for sure, the outcome here is very hard to predict. The only thing for sure is that the combination of IH and Jones-Day far outshines Rossi and Annasser et al. But again, that in no way guarantees the outcome.


    Quote

    In this case, they should also justify the email and internal communications in which they claimed to have had good results from their Ecat test, with COPs greater than 1 !

    That's not that difficult. They trusted Rossi and used his recommended methods for measuring "COP" and they were mislead and deceived by the con man.

  • Also IH has sued Rossi: among its reasons is the alleged non-functioning of the Doral Plant. In this case is Rossi the defendant who does not have to prove his innocence .

    that is right but remember this thread is Rossi vs Darden not Darden vs Rossi which is the counter suit.

  • Yes, but I would have thought that the customer would have been included in this thread but Alan did not like that.


    I have no idea what you mean. My comment above was related to people making 'content free' posts - content free in terms of quoting evidence from court documents - about who was an was not lying. While truth and lies are hopefully relevant when this goes to court, right now merely saying 'Darden was lying, Rossi was lying' without context is simply a waste of space - and will very likely get moved to the Playground. The suggestion that anything gets censored short of libel and insults is entirely wrong - moved maybe, but that's about it.

  • Abd had mentioned going. If he does, no one could cover it better. I think he is tight on money though. Maybe he will set up some funding account, so we could pitch in?

    Not sure if this in the rules here or not. Mods - forgive me if this is against some rule - feel free to delete if it is and accept my apology. . But He does have a gofundme account.

    https://www.gofundme.com/cold-fusion-journalism

    for going to the trial and other things. I think the trial is his main objective.

  • I do hope Abd goes, although it would be better to have someone with a little less slant on their analysis.


    IHFB,


    Abd may not have been a fan of Rossi, but he, like me, Jed, most here, and everyone on ECW :) , at one time believed Rossi may have had something. So just because you have hung on longer to the dream, does not give you the moral authority to accuse any of us of being "slanted".


    Abd would do just fine. Plus he needs a tan, and what better place than Miami?

  • Not sure if this in the rules here or not. Mods - forgive me if this is against some rule - feel free to delete if it is and accept my apology. . But He does have a gofundme account.

    https://www.gofundme.com/cold-fusion-journalism

    for going to the trial and other things. I think the trial is his main objective.


    I can think of no possible reason why Mods would object to your posting a link to a gofundme page. Most people (I almost said everybody) here are grown-ups and free to spend their money however they wish. BTW, the capital 'H' in 'he' is usually reserved for divinities. ;)

  • So enough shots to you means the time that Darden secretly loaded Murray's modified e-Cat with fuel, which was then tested by Murray for a few months, and then boxed up? Come on. Dameron was still running the IH-Rossi-built reactor in the same building. Did Dameron like running non-functioning reactors for 2+ years? And you give Murray a few months then box everything up? Doesn't sound like Murray had enough time to replicate properly the IH-Rossi-built reactor. Is it reasonable to expect anyone--even Einstein himself--to successfully build and test a modified e-Cat reactor within just a few months?


    Wow. Just wow.


    For months IHFB and many others have been arguing that IH are evil because they let Rossi do the test knowing his stuff did not work. Against their stated logic that they wanted to do everything they could to get his stuff to work even if only a 1% chance, and that they did not want to upset Rossi in case he could still help them do that.


    Now suddenly we are told that IH did not allow Murray enough time to test Rossi's stuff - they should have kept on trying longer?


    It is just plain bias

  • Jed said (in me356 thread):


    Quote

    Oh come now. The Doral temperature data was reported for every day to the nearest 0.1 deg C, with the highest reading for each day. The variation should have been as great as, say, hourly readings. Averaging would tend to make the numbers the same but this was not averaged. Yet it showed exactly the same temperature day in and day out for weeks. That is impossible!



    1) For output temperature it was actually the lowest reading for each day


    2) If you look at the T_out data from this file

    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…01/0194.16_Exhibit_16.pdf


    It appears that it wasn't to the nearest 0.1 deg C. Here we are working with a discrete set of possible temperature values: 103.9, 104.5, 105.1.


    So more accurate would be to say the temperature data was reported to the nearest 0.5 or 0.6 deg C.


  • My comments are derived from sworn testimony provided by Murray. He states what happened in remarkable detail. It clearly touched a nerve with Dewey, and apparently with you.

  • IHFG returns with his circular argument logic using .03% of the available truth and disregarding the other 99.97% of the available facts.

    He must win everything on Planet Rossi - Bingo, Hopscotch, Musical Chairs, Spoon, Churchill Solitaire (oh wait... only the Brits are smart enough for that game).

  • @Dewey,


    Please then, correct me where I'm wrong. Why didn't you afford Murray more time? Do you honestly feel that a few months was enough? Why was Dameron still running the IH-Rossi-built reactor as late as 2016, and attempting to transfer knowledge to Murray?


    I only have the record of sworn testimony before me. Maybe you can cast some additional light on the matter for us rather than cast aspersions.