I suspect the beige box is the condenser visible in the hallway in Exhibit 26 of the IH amended Answer (versions 2 to 4).
Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]
- barty
- Closed
-
-
30-26? photos of warehouse and customer area
http://coldfusioncommunity.net…11/0030.26_Exhibit_26.pdf
No.
-
A co inventor only has to have one creative input on one claim to be required to add his/her name to the patent application. I have no idea of Dameron's input but... for an example, if he used a temperature sensor (claim 11) when Rossi did not, or used DC current when Rossi only claimed AC (claim 5) then I think they would be require to add his name to the patent app.
I wonder whether this requirement sets up a perverse incentive for an inventor to boss around assistants and insist that they do things exactly as he or she says. (This musing pertains to US IP law and not to the Rossi v. Darden case.)
-
I don't see any PR campaign by IH. They actually have said very little publically other than a press release that says don't believe others on behalf of IH.
We must live in different worlds. IH has continued their massive PR campaign into the public filings made on the court docket. They have continued it through their experts, who include, for example, a picture with giant red arrows pointing to everything except the apparent two missing window panes. They have continued it through apparent "advisors" cherry picked from the LENR community, and most likely paid some sort of adviser (aka loyalty) fees. They have continued it through surrogates such as Dewey. Don't fool yourself.
-
I found this video a useful introduction to solenoid pumps.
-
Document 253
Ties up a few things I wanted answering after reading Rossi's answer.
- What is the scope of FDUTPA? (Clearly beyond consumers)
- Are specific damages needed (No)
- Does Rossi's claim of oral agreement trump the written no-oral-waiver? (not sure IH's arguments here are tight, but they look plausible)
- Does replication matter (yes, the wording of IP transfer in the license agreement: everything necessary to manufacture etc.... is tantamount to replication)
I learnt a new word that is particularly useful when dealing with Rossi: conclusory.
The Rossi action looks legally very questionable - It would be interesting to know how he was advised initially before starting it. But, given he was Rossi, maybe he ignored such advice?
-
-
I have a question for jed, If Rossi,s tech doesn`t work and IH had concerns about said technology all the way back to 2013, why would they be applying for a euro patent as late as Nov of 2015. This is what this lawsuit is all about. it`s all about the IP.
-
I don't see any PR campaign by IH.
There is none! Claiming there is a PR campaign by IH is total BS and conspiracy theory idiocy.
IH has made two statements to the public. Neither of which were even close to what some here claim as a "massive PR campaign". Two statements are really a big campaign are they not? One was announcing that they indeed were working with Rossi and the second was not to believe anything about IH information unless it came from them. Both completely reasonable and professional.
The Rossi camp, on the other hand, continually, even to this day, uses sock puppets on JOPN. ECW bans anyone who is not a "Rossi Believer" after a short period and certain posters here certainly are raging a "massive PR campaign" in Rossi's favor. Simply look at the number of posts and content! Again, hypocrisy is not a noble trait!
Claiming posters here such as Jed, Dewey or others who have "pro" IH views are part of a "massive PR" campaign is absolutely NO different than claiming IHFB, Engineer 48 and almost everyone at ECW are part of an even greater "massive PR" campaign put on by Rossi! This notion is ridiculous. It is conspiracy theory stuff and most importantly, is about as hypocritical as anything posted here.
Imagine! IH is being accused of a "massive PR" campaign by defending themselves against an $89 million dollar lawsuit by providing evidence and depositions to the court. IH does not publish these to the public, the court does. It is part of the law. The same as Rossi. Is it not interesting how the "unbiased" and "seeking for truth" participant here accuses IH of PR campaign by court documents which provide solid evidence for their defense, while he does not accuse Rossi of the same and Rossi's submissions to the court, so far have been pretty much rubbish?!? Rossi is doing the exact same thing, providing documents to the court! Only his documents are doing a very poor job of making his case. IH's submissions on the other hand, are doing a very good job defending them.
To accuse IH of this is beyond reasoning, it is delusional. Someone has indeed "fooled themselves"!
-
-
@Bob
It is very simple.
Conspiracy Theory 101.
When IH submit evidence it is really PR.
When IH say anything it is clearly lies.
When IH say nothing they are clearly hiding something.
-
-
We should not blindly blame Rossi for all the his said to defend his position, and we should not blame IH on all what supporters said.
Most of what we all say is simply our opinion, sadly biased by our expectations and fear, inspired by our stakes.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pini…231f2307e2cd22181ae00.jpg
It works for any asset, not only salary, and especially emotional assets, like ideologies, pride, hope,.
-
I have a question for jed, If Rossi,s tech doesn`t work and IH had concerns about said technology all the way back to 2013, why would they be applying for a euro patent as late as Nov of 2015.
I have not discussed this with them so I do not know. However, I believe they thought Rossi might just have something despite all the problems. In the lawsuit documents they said they will keep going even if there was only a 1% chance the claims were real. So they filed a patent just in case it was real. If any part of the claims are real, that patent would be worth billions of dollars, so it is worth the expense of filing.
I think this is also why they want to hang on to their intellectual property (IP) rights, even though they now think the claims are bogus. I would do that, if I were them.
Perhaps the "1%" decision was partly prompted by sunk costs.
-
"We don't have written proof of what we say about our communication with Rossi because it was all oral, we don't understand what he means when writing in all caps, so we figured it was best not to create solid evidence of disagreement in what we were feeling was a volatile situation"
-
... I understand motivations such as those of Mats Lewan and others which is that the risk is simply too high to dismiss his claims. However, I don't agree with this position as "clean" energy is now more affordable than the dirty alternatives. We don't have to have a working LENR technology, although it certainly would be nice.
Hi Jack,
When wars over resources are no longer a thing; when tens of millions of children around the world no longer go hungry every day; and when humans have colonized the solar system, then I'll agree with you that we don't have to have a working LENR technology. Until then, solar just ain't going to cut it.
-
"We don't have written proof of what we say about our communication with Rossi because it was all oral, we don't understand what he means when writing in all caps, so we figured it was best not to create solid evidence of disagreement in what we were feeling was a volatile situation"
I think you have mischaracterized the situation. I think they do have written proof. But I would point out that when someone fails as badly as Rossi did, with such blatant in-your-face fraud, most people would not expect him to file a $267 million lawsuit. That is extraordinary chutzpah! World-class chutzpah. The people at I.H. are experienced venture capitalists but I'll bet they never saw behavior as outrageous as this. I certainly have not. I thought I knew Rossi pretty well by the time the 1-year test ended, but I was flabbergasted by the lawsuit. So, if their preparations for the suit are not ideal, it is understandable. Who would anticipate or prepare for such a thing?
I expected Rossi to take his money and run. I figured he would go to Sweden, where he has already lined up a new group of people to defraud.
-
254 lays out Rossi's defense, and offense, and answers a lot of questions we have had about his actions. Particularly with JMP; where he makes the case that IH showed little interest as to who the customer was, or even if they were real, having done almost no DD...which Rossi took as their wink/nod approval. All IH cared about were results he claimed, and the data shows he lived up to his end of the deal.
Asserts also that he had told them (IH) he was JMP's director early on. That there was a product he, as JMP, sold to himself as Leonardo, proving there was a need for steam. He purposely represented his 3 selves (Rossi/Leonardo/JMP) in communications, as distinct from each other because he felt doing so was necessary.
Made a good case for estoppel, I think, for calling Doral the GPT. Showed weakness though, with AEG not signing IMO. Muddles the VT issue (Italian law) enough so that it may be mute. Rossi says almost nothing about the test in terms of performance, as he has so far...data speaks for itself. He will leave that one alone in court, and when challenged he has Wong to back him up.
Ignores the spoliation, but says the 1MW plant was incomplete after arriving in Doral, so he had to put it back together. And that he had a right by the contract to do that as he felt necessary. Denied taking off the steam trap.
These are my overall impressions after a reading. Lots more in there. I think this will rally Rossi's supporters, as it is what they have been arguing all along. More of the same for the rest of us. As for me, I see in 254 Rossi springing the trap on the mark. He chose the right investors for the sting. A save the planet type, with access to lots of money, that knew his background, knew the science was unverified, yet still ready to do business without much oversight. TD admittedly gave Rossi free reign, and much latitude to do what he wanted, even when he suspected all along that Rossi may be defrauding him, and his carelessness just may end up costing him.
-
The chutzpah continues! The lastest filing says:
"Disputed. J.M. Products was a real customer with its own operations to use steam produced by the 1MW Plant to treat platinum sponge to create catalyzers for sale. See Supp. Exs. 58, 45 at 185:23-186:20. IPH has no proof to contradict this representation. See Ex. 17 at 149:19-150:8. In fact, J.M. Products did use steam generated by the 1MW Plant to create platinum-sponge and/or grapheme based catalyzers for sale to Leonardo."
-
For me, this is the heart of the matter:
254, p. 14
"Defendants claimed on numerous occasions that they had replicated the results that Plaintiffs achieved using the E-Cat IP, see SOF ¶ 32; SOFO ¶ 40, only to allege otherwise once they had been sued for the $89 million.4 Notably, Defendants could not point to a single document in which they notified Plaintiffs of their alleged inability to replicate the technology, whether as a result of their incompetence, faulty equipment, inferior materials, or outright lies. See SOF ¶¶ 31, 33."
"4 Defendants provide self-serving testimony that their positive results were “preliminary” and were “later retracted.” See Def. SOFO ¶ 32. Of course, Defendants offer no written evidence of such retractions, whether they be contemporaneous or after the present lawsuit was filed."
When the following statement was released: "Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success," I knew there was skullduggery at play, and that IH had just thrown an proverbial bomb onto the LENR community. And thus began my journey to follow every twist and turn of this case.
