Ha ha yes, those square pistons used by Farrari are top secret 
Sorry to say, the US patent really is nothing more than a water heater. I think you should read it with open eyes rather than believe everything your beloved Andrea feeds you. Anyone for tennis
The granted US patent is valid and not worthless
So if it is well protected - why the hell do you not bring your product to market and make a heck of a lot of money? Oh, sorry ele - I always mixing you up with AR... 
Those are very different world views. The two groups are not at all alike.
Jed I presume that both views can't be true at the same time !
Oh, sorry ele - I always mixing you up with AR...
Really ?
I'm honored but I'm not AR.
280 is the go-to document of the day!
(Nothing new technically)
121 agreed statements of fact
311 outstanding issues for trial (some look duplicates to me).
20 issues of law to be decided.
Levi & the Lugano team may testify.
Rossi and IH may claim up to $7,500,000 each in costs.
QuoteI wonder why Rossi has not sold any other Ecat/quark to other customers outside of IH territory?
Seriously? Because there is no QuarkX. Like there never was a working ecat. Like Rossi never got a PhD from an accredited school. Like he never made inexpensive isotopes of nickel or any other element. Like he never had a military customer or for that matter any other paying customer who ever said the ecat worked. Like there were never robotic factories. Like there were really no plans to sell power in Scandinavia. Like Rossi never worked with the U of Bologna or U of Upsala. Like he never did a truly independent experiment or a properly calibrated and controlled one. Like he never had efficient thermoelectric devices or a secret process for converting toxic waste to oil.... like... shall I go on? The evidence is OVERWHELMING that Rossi is nothing but a con man. A crook. With no real accomplishments other than fooling people. None EVER.
QuoteLevi & the Lugano team may testify.
Wow. If Jones Day finds a decent expert to help them out (an expert in calorimetry, heat transfer and fluid flow-- not an LENR expert!) then their cross-examination should be hilarious. For openers, they could hire Krivit. I would love to hear the blind mice's excuses for letting Rossi's paws all over the experiment and for not providing their own calibration ahead of Rossi's instruments on the input and downstream of his on the output. I would love to hear how Levi failed to repeat his original ecat experiment in which he found stunning amounts of power and the measurement system had no phase change. All sorts of excitement is possible if those folks testify. Given that they don't live in the US, I doubt that they can be compelled and they would be total fools to volunteer.
276
Judge denies IH's spoliation (destroying piping between plants/upstairs heat exchanger) request:
"Specifically, Judge O’Sullivan found that:
(1) the request was untimely because the Defendants failed to bring this matter to the court for approximately a year after learning of the alleged spoliation;
(2) that the pipe and heat exchanger were removed in or around March 2016, but no duty to preserve arose until August of 2016;
(3) that the allegedly spoliated evidence is not crucial; rather, it is cumulative; and
(4) Defendants have not shown any bad faith.
The Court further found that Defendants failed to take sufficient steps to obtain other copies of the Penon communications; either through questioning Dr. Penon during deposition, obtaining such communications form the e-mail server, or accepting Plaintiffs’ offer to examine the e-mail servers."
For openers, they could hire Krivit.
Yes, let's hope they do. LOL, perhaps the most unsympathetic witness available. I'm sure the jury would love to hear from a person like Krivit, and would be highly persuaded by him (not).
The list of potential trial witnesses is quite interesting in 280.
Penon, and other "expert witnesses", will take the stand on Rossi's behalf:
"Similarly, Dr. Penon, as the expert agreed-upon by Plaintiffs and Defendants to validate the underlying technology and certify the results of the Guaranteed Performance Test, will also testify to the facts, observations, measurements and conclusions gathered and formulated by him during the Guaranteed Performance Test. Such information includes information within the scope of Penon’s duties and functions as the ERV as contemplated by the License Agreement and the subsequent understandings of the parties. Defendants have employed expert witnesses to opine on the work performed by both Dr. Rossi and Dr. Penon"
Rossi will...cough, cough, play drama queen/victim on stand:
"The Defendants assert that “Plaintiffs should be barred from presenting evidence or
arguments relating to Rossi’s physical illnesses or ailments at trial because such information is irrelevant to any claim or defense in this case and would only serve to unduly prejudice the jury.” Notably, Dr. Rossi previously suffered from an ailment that caused him to cough excessively and periodically caused him to have reflux which had to be dispelled into a cup or other vassal. Since his deposition, Dr. Rossi has had surgery to correct the ailment and is still recovering therefrom. Accordingly, any mention of Dr. Rossi’s physical illnesses or ailments would be offered only for the purposes of explaining his appearance and/or reasons for coughing at any point during trial and/or during depositions"
Judge says of Penon shipping measuring equipment out of country...that's OK by me! :
"Defendants argue that the measuring devices that Dr. Penon installed at the 1 MW E-Cat Plan to measure the performance were removed and shipped out of the country. ECF However, the Defendants and/or their agents were present at the time the recording devices were removed. Defendants did not object, question or otherwise raise any concerns regarding the removal of such devices. The Defendants also did not request inspection of such devices at any time during the course of discovery. Rather, Defendants (yet again) rely on their own lack of diligence in this matter in an effort to sway the merits of this action"
Judge, shockingly, finally finds Rossi did something wrong...but no big deal:
"Judge on 4/20/2017 hearing transcript (276-01): But at least as to Dr. Rossi's possession, he did not -- it's (emails) missing from his possession. I
find that he did have a duty to preserve that and that steps were taken to preserve them shortly after the filing of the lawsuit. However, I find that their existence is not crucial to
proving or disproving -- proving either the Plaintiffs' case or the Defendants' case or disproving either of those cases or disproving the Plaintiffs' case in that they would be cumulative to the records that we know now exist."
280 has an excellent summary of IH's case. This guy is listed, in Rossi's corner, I think: https://www.crcpress.com/authors/i163-kaufui-vincent-wong
I remember seeing somewhere in court documents that Rossi's claims violate conservation of energy. They don't if they assume a nuclear process that converts mass to energy. In fact, violation of thermodynamic laws is the least of Rossi's problems, LOL. I wonder what Wong is going to testify about? I doubt he will say that the ecat works!
Ha ha yes, those square pistons used by Farrari are top secret
Sorry to say, the US patent really is nothing more than a water heater. I think you should read it with open eyes rather than believe everything your beloved Andrea feeds you. Anyone for tennis
Are you sure the patent is not already used ?
Maybe you should take a close look to your water heater to see if there is not a LENR device hidden in it.
I remember seeing somewhere in court documents that Rossi's claims violate conservation of energy. They don't if they assume a nuclear process that converts mass to energy.
That is correct. However, his test claims violate some thermodynamics and gas laws. This was explained by Rick Smith in Documents 235-01 and 235-10. For example, 235-10, p. 15:
". . . The data show that the temperature did rise, so what about the pressure?
The pressure stayed at precisely 1.0028, with no variation (to the 1/10,000 of a bar) for all but the first four seconds of the power outage, in other words, for the next hour and a half. The laws of thermodynamics prohibit this because of the pressure / temperature relationship of boiling fluids – as the temperature rises, the pressure must also rise. . . ."
That is correct. However, his test claims violate some thermodynamics and gas laws. This was explained by Rick Smith in Documents 235-01 and 235-10. For example, 235-10, p. 15:
". . . The data show that the temperature did rise, so what about the pressure?
The pressure stayed at precisely 1.0028, with no variation (to the 1/10,000 of a bar) for all but the first four seconds of the power outage, in other words, for the next hour and a half. The laws of thermodynamics prohibit this because of the pressure / temperature relationship of boiling fluids – as the temperature rises, the pressure must also rise. . . ."
Not only that, the only short term pressure reading we were given (April 1st no less) showed the pressure meter was lower than the barometric pressure for Miami on that day and the variations through the day did not follow the atmospheric variation in size or timing. The pressure sensor was not reliable and outside its stated ranges.
Yikes! Charles and Boyle must be rolling over in their graves.
Smith is no friend of LENR. He equates LENR with perpetual motion machines and states that it violates first and second laws of thermodynamics.
215-4, p 133
21
Q. And other than what you've read, you have no
22 knowledge whatsoever or opinion with respect to whether
23 it's nuclear or any other type of reaction?
24 MR. LOMAX: Objection to the form of the
25 question.
1 A. Again, I'm not going -- I'm not going to
2 agree to your assertion because Mr. Stokes was a Navy
3 nukie, he's an official with the State of Florida, he
4 is stating that there's no ionizing radiation, there
5 was not a nuclear reaction.
6 And I read some other -- maybe it was him --
7 nuclear analysis that said if there were a nuclear
8 reaction going on in there, it would be a very
9 dangerous place for people to work.
10 Q. Okay. And what was that that you read?
11 A. Again, I read -- I've done a lot of Internet
12 research, but I take that with a huge dose of
13 scepticism.
14 Q. But you rely on it? But you still rely on
15 it?
16 A. If I can -- if I can independently confirm
17 it. You know, and just because it's -- oh, wait, no, I
18 forgot, if it's on the Internet, it must be true,
19 right?
20 No, I take -- I take a lot, particularly in
21 areas like that, alternative in energy so for, there's
22 a lot of quackery going on. I take all that with a
23 huge, huge grain of salt, sir.
pp 149-150
20 Q. Okay. And did you find that -- did you use
21 that description in any way in formulating your
22 opinions in this case?
23 A. I did.
24 Q. Okay. How so?
25 A. If you go to page 214, middle of the page
1 just above Heat Reservoir, the next -- the second
2 sentence up, a perpetual motion machine, excuse me, of
3 the kind -- first kind, a PMM1, in parenthesis, is a
4 device which creates energy and thus violates the first
5 law of thermodynamics. Any process which creates a
6 PMM1 or a PMM2 is impossible.
7 Q. What is a PMM1 or PMM2?
8 A. Perpetual motion machine.
9 Q. What is the difference between 1 --
10 A. Okay. The difference, the first one is it
11 violates the first law in that it creates energy. And
12 then the second one violates the second law in that you
13 can have a machine that basically keeps on running of
14 its own accord.
What, exactly, do you object to in the quote you cited? Seems entirely reasonable to me inasmuch as I can make sense of that mostly word salad.
