Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from IH Fanboy

I think there is ambiguity. It could be interpreted either way. In fact, I think the best interpretation is that "the plant" referred to the whole setup, including the equipment on the JMP side. Otherwise, why would the email say that the "Customer will install the plant"?

IHFB: your thoughts here are pointedly biased, as has been the case often on this thread.

I refer you to sigmoidal's excellent summary (with original references) below. Now here is the test for your reading skills:

(1) Rossi is claiming (lying) that the customer already has a factory in Florida, and runs his own secret process

(2)

a. the Customer will install the plant in a factory of his in Florida.

b. I confirm all I already said: we have a Customer who pays 1,000 $/day to rent the 1MW plant, put it in his factory in Miami, produce catalyzers that he sells; I will direct the operation of the plant for the first year, the contract will be for 3 years, renewable.

c. ...He needs to prepare the factory in Florida with a dryer to be coupled with our plant, under my direction, and this work has to be started as soon as possible...

You read only a. and (stretching plausibility in the context) think the best interpretation is that plant refers to the customer's factory equipment, as well as the Rossi 1MW plant. The other quotes b. and c., which you ignore, make the matter clearer. Note that b. is also saying the customer will install the plant, with no ambiguity as to meaning, so apparently Rossi needs to say this and your question above is therefore moot.

What is it about this story that encourages otherwise apparently rational posters to so distort interpretations? You might almost think there is a virus, caught from over-reading of Rossi's JONP, that requires sufferers to adopt Rossi-esque distortions as fact.

Quote from sigmoidal

Well, let's take a look at Rossi's emails in June 2014 on the Docket, to see exactly what he said (Document 236-28):

On June 3rd, 1pm (excerpt):

[unrelated]

...

p.s.

I have found a Customer that will use the 1MW plant in his factory in Florida, paying Industrial Heat and also I am in contact with the health Care office for the authorization. I think in short time we can have the 1MW plant in operation. We must stay extremely focused on this now.

• Rossi has found a Customer, and 'he' is none other than Rossi himself. (BTW, Isn't this the highest level of Masow's hierarchy of needs, 'self discovery'? Rossi has found himself!)
  
• Rossi states that he is also in contact with the 'health Care office' for the authorization. (Does anyone believe he actually was in contact with such an agency?)

On June 3, 3:39pm (excerpt):

... it is necessary to have:

1- A Customer that uses the energy of the plant

2 - The necessary authorizations

If you have found the solutions, welcome. If not, I have and it is necessary we talk about these issues to establish a roadmap.

Warm Regards to all,

Andrea

• Rossi has 'found the solution', and he points out IH has not. Rossi's solution is to pose himself as the 'real customer' to IH.

Leonardo Corporation [controlled by Rossi] has found this solution:

On June 20th (excerpt):

...

a- a Customer has been found who will rent the 1MW plant to use it as a dryer for his chemical additives and catalyzers.

b- the Customer will install the plant in a factory of his in Florida.

c- the Customer will pay 1,000 $/day of rental fee starting from when the plant will be declared from me ready to operate. [Rossi is clearly talking about the 1MW plant here]

d- the director of the plant will be made by Andrea Rossi, for free, for the first 350 days of operation of the plant. [Again, Rossi is clearly talking about the 1MW plant here - any other meaning would be absurd - like he's going to operate the "real Customer's" plant for free?' that would certainly raise suspicion by IH]

e-Andrea Rossi will be assisted by Fulvio Fabiani who is a consultant of Industrial Heat. [Note that Fabiani has said he was not allowed on the JMP side. So this further supports the context that Rossi is describing how he will be supported in running the 1MW plant (not the JMP 'plant' - which was really just a crude serpentine pipe radiator - not any kind of 'plant').]

f- the Customer will have no access to the technology [of the 1MW e-cat], but his workers will be instructed to use the plant [again, this can only be construed to mean the 1MW plant] Maintenance and recharge will be made by Industrial Heat with the direction of Andrea Rossi. Since I have already started the operation regarding this plan please let me know if you agree upon all. [Rossi states that he 'had already started', but actually didn't have a warehouse, factory, real customer, or any reason for a 1 MW dryer (or dryer of any size energy)]

On June 10th and 23rd, Rossi sent emails that I already dissected in my previous post. The only statements describing 'direction' (excerpts):

June 10:

...

I confirm all I already said: we have a Customer who pays 1,000 $/day to rent the 1MW plant, put it in his factory in Miami, produce catalyzers that he sells; I will direct the operation of the plant for the first year, the contract will be for 3 years, renewable. The customer will not have access to the reactors.

...

• The Customer is Rossi - he had no factory, produced no catalyzers to sell.
• The only mention of the word 'plant' in this email is the 1MW plant, which of course someone had to 'direct' - so obviously, Rossi is stating that he will direct the 1MW plant, not "the Customer's".
• It's easy, however, to see how Rossi could confuse himself about these issues, given that he is talking about himself in the second and third person all the time.

June 23:

... He needs to prepare the factory in Florida with a dryer to be coupled with our plant, under my direction, and this work has to be started as soon as possible...

• Rossi is clearly stating that the 1MW plant will be under his direction, not the "Customer's" dryer. (Of course, we now know that he was directing everything, since this was all part of his scam.)
• Rossi cannot reasonably argue that this sentence, in context, is stating that he 'informed IH that he would be directing the plant in JM' for (at least) two reasons:
• 1) 'JM' has not even been mentioned yet, and is not stated in the email. Rossi didn't 'reveal' Johnson Mathey or JM until July.
• 2) At most, the sentence could be meaning that 'under my direction' would apply to the 'coupling' of the 1MW plant to the customers dryer, not to directing the customer's dryer (which Rossi does not call a plant). Rossi only uses the word 'plant' to refer to the 1MW plant. He makes this clear when he references it as 'our plant'.

Based on the evidence on the docket, Rossi's statements on JONP that he informed IH that he would be directing 'JM' are untrue. There are no emails in June (or any other time) where Rossi informs IH that he is the director of JM. Of course, we now know that he directed everything. And it is clear from the emails, that this was his pre-conceived plan to deceive and scam IH.

Display More

Quote from IH Fanboy

first and foremost being the reliability of the smart meter (which are notoriously unreliable).

Yes. That is why power companies everywhere are going out of business. They replaced millions of old fashioned meters without noticing that the smart meters are notoriously unreliable, and now they are paying the price. In some cases the meters are installed backwards so the power companies have to pay residential customers tens of thousands of dollars a month!

Oh wait. That didn't happen. You made that shit up, didn't you?

IH Fanboy ,

Fabiani's numbers mostly match, but the date is often offset, both from Rossi and the ERV report. In many places the numbers do not match, by a lot.

Rossi scribbled down 103.3 or thereabouts hundreds of times, the ups and downs of which seem to have almost no relationship to the steam T provided by the ERV report, and snippets of Fabiani data, or breakdowns for that matter.

Fabiani disagrees with the water flowed per day in the ERV report many times. He calculated COP twice daily, even.

Fabiani agrees with the ERV, mostly, that the Plant used more electricity than was supplied by FPL for two weeks, straight. If those meters were that wrong for that long even infrequently, FPL would never have installed them. They are in the business of measuring power delivered.

JMP (as a separate entity) does not agree with Rossi on how much energy JMP recieved vs sent from the Leonardo side of the selective membrane wall.

JMP (that side of the wall) was totally incapable of measuring energy recieved from the Leonardo side, independently. Therefore Rossi disagrees with himself regarding the Plant output.

Quote from IH Fanboy

In fact that is what IH essentially did when the various IH shell companies were deposed. Companies are persons: legal fictions. And people who own different companies often refer to them as such, as if they were separate persons. And that is okay.

But I never heard of someone saying I talked to the director and he said.... when they were referring to themselves.

IH Fanboy

and no one has explain why the only short term pressure reading (for April) were all below atmospheric pressure and that the pressure readings never showed any variation due to barometric pressure changes.

I'm gunning for a new urban dictionary word.

Rossiesque

Rossiesque [language]

misinterpretation of words or phrases which are individually ambiguous but clear in context. Typically used to misrepresent facts or claim previous false statements are correct.

When you use the word plant multiple times in reference to the 1MW plant, and then say "Andrea Rossi will direct the plant" it takes some really twisted reading comprehension to think Rossi says he will direct the JMP plant.

http://coldfusioncommunity.net…/01/236-28-Exhibit-28.pdf

For example:

Quote

SITUATION
I have completed the organization of my plan to put the 1 MW in operation. I confirm all I already said: we have a Customer who pays 1,000 $ /day to rent the 1 MW plant, put it in his factory in Miami, produce catalyzers that he sells; I will direct the operation of the plant for the first year, the contract will be for 3 years, renewable. The Custo will not ave access to the reactors, that will remain under our full control for maintainance and recharge. For the permissions, I already got the necessary instructions along what I already had been told before, as you know. In the meantime: I will start the next Monday with Barry the application of the components we are buying this week by T.Barker ( the list I gave to Elizabeth) that Fulvio is finding in this moment on the Internet, as T.Barker asked for. Fulvio will receive tomorrow the container from Italy with all his lab and components for to make the upgrading of the control system: as soon as ready it will be mounted on the plant. Tomorrow I will be in Raleigh, to work on the 1 MW plant.

En

If you take the reading that "1MW plant"= e-cat and "plant"= JMP, then do we have to also understand that the control system will be mounted on the JMP operation?

Seriously, you can't use the word plant 4 times in an e-mail and have the second use of the word be different from the rest.

Then, we can look at the term sheet

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

Quote

8. Dr Andrea Rossi of Leonardo Corp will be responsible for the operation of the 1MW plant, assisted by Eng. Fulvio Fabiani and any others designated by IH. There will be no additional cost to JMC or IH for these services

This is basically a rewording of Rossi's email (below)

Quote

this email is for to confirm what we agreed upon during the meeting of June 17th in the factory of Industrial Heat in Raleigh.
Preliminary considerations:
1- in August 2013, according with our License Agreement of October 26th 2012, Leonardo Corporation delivered the 1 MW plant as it was when has been tested in Ferrara on April 30 and May 1 2013
2- since August 2013 it has benn Impossible to communicate to us the where to install and make operative the plant
Said this, to make operative the plant and pursuant to the Section 3.1, 3(c) and Section 5 of the same License Agreement, Leonardo Corporation has found this solution:
a- a Customer has been found who will rent the 1 MW plant to use it as a dryer for his chemical additives and catalyzers
b- the Customer will install the plant in a factory of his in Florida ( USA) c- the Customer will pay 1,000 $ /day of rental fee starting from when the plant will be declared from me ready to operate
d- the direction of the plant will be made by Andrea Rossi, for free, for the first 350 days of operation of the plant
e- Andrea Rossi will be assisted by Fulvio Fablani who Is a consultant of Industrial heat f- the Customer will have no access to the technology, but his workers will be instructed to use the plant. Maintainance and recharge will be made by Industrial Heat with the direction of Andrea Rossi. Since I have already started the operation regarding this plan, please let me know if you agree upon all.
I already started the operations. Warmest regards and a wonderful week end to all, Andrea Rossi

Display More

If Rossi meant that he would direct the JMP operations, then why didn't he correct the term sheet? According to his deposition, saying that he will direct the 1MW plant is ridiculous, because it will be like telling his wife that he is his husband.

However, it made sense to specify that he would run the 1MW plant, because he is doing it at no additional cost.

Rossi also says "he Customer will have no access to the technology, but his workers will be instructed to use the plant."

Why would the customer's workers need instruction to use the JMP plant?

A compilation of e-mails which nicely shows how the "Term Sheet" (draft version also named "Rental Agreement of the 1MW e-cat of industrial heat" - but never GPT) evolved over time (Doc 245-3)

http://coldfusioncommunity.net…7/01/245-03-Exhibit-3.pdf

Please note that in early versions, Johnson Matthey ("JM") was explicity referenced, e.g. on page 4 of the linked document, clause 2:

Johnson Matthey operates a production facility in Miami, FL, which requires low temperature steam.

Obviously IH at that time believe that they were dealing with the reputable British company "Johnson Matthey" (or at least with an affiliate/subsidary of "Johnson Matthey"), and Rossi intentionally let them believe it - See also Rossi's e-mail on page 13 of the linked document.

(I think there is another e-mail - which I didn't find now - in the docket where Rossi opposes Darden to meet with Johnson Matthey guys In London, but not for the reason because Johnson Matthey isn't related with the customer ...)

Quote from THHuxleynew

c. ...He needs to prepare the factory in Florida with a dryer to be coupled with our plant, under my direction, and this work has to be started as soon as possible...

The difference is you see perfect clarity (due to your own personal biases) where I see ambiguity (due to my open mindedness). Take for example c., where Rossi says "under my direction." You would immediately jump to the conclusion that this phrase modifies "coupled with our plant," whereas I would point out that it could just as easily modify "He needs to prepare the factory in Florida with a dryer." Under the latter interpretation, Rossi is stating that it is all taking place under his direction.

Quote from JedRothwell

Oh wait. That didn't happen. You made that shit up, didn't you?

No, I've provided links and articles about this in the past. If you want to see them, read my past posts.

Quote from THHuxleynew

IHFB: your thoughts here are pointedly biased, as has been the case often on this thread.

@THH: Your level of eloquence is going deep down (below) the street.

If you argue, that a comment is biased without telling why it is biassed, then your comment is (biased)²...

It looks like IH-coverage reached a level of infinite repetition of known facts and absurd distortion of (for IH) damaging facts.

To make it clear. The trial goes to Jury. No more cheap escapes for IH are possible. The only cheap thing they get are the alternate facts in this forum.

I ask the mods to close this thread and to open a new one covering the Jury trial.

Not yet: there's still an upcoming hearing 5/23? There are still motions for summary judgement on the table.

Quote from Wyttenbach

@THH: Your level of eloquence is going deep down (below) the street.

If you argue, that a comment is biased without telling why it is biassed, then your comment is (biased)²...

It looks like IH-coverage reached a level of infinite repetition of known facts and absurd distortion of (for IH) damaging facts.

To make it clear. The trial goes to Jury. No more cheap escapes for IH are possible. The only cheap thing they get are the alternate facts in this forum.

I ask the mods to close this thread and to open a new one covering the Jury trial.

Display More

It would be - if I did.

Maybe you can't read more than one line of the post you reference?

Also, whereas I provide details to justify my summary - you provide a summary with no justification.

As Alan says we have MSJ's still to be decided - your grasp of US jurisprudence would seem as sketchy as of this case. The Jury Trial is not yet assured. If IH win their spoliation motion they will win the defense against Rossi at MTD time and the only thing Jury will decide is whether Rossi is fraudulent. That will be a fun case.

Quote from THHuxleynew

If IH win their spoliation motion they will win the defense against Rossi at MTD time and the only thing Jury will decide is whether Rossi is fraudulent. That will be a fun case.

Hope springs eternal!

I find it interesting that Rossi's supporters tend to gloss over the difference between being a director of JM (Johnson Matthey) which Rossi claimed to have a working production plant that had to immediately have an answer about working together and JMP which is just a empty company run by Rossi and Johnson and appears to be falsely claimed to be a UK organization.

Quote from IH Fanboy

No, I've provided links and articles about this in the past. If you want to see them, read my past posts.

The reason is that the links you give before are not to the point unless you twist them are believe in things just because Rossi says so. I will ask you again to give a direct collaboration of negotiations between Johnston Matthey that is anything but Rossi says. If you cannot, the you cannot use that as an excuse to say Rossi was dealing with IH in good faith about the customer.

oldguy,

I suggest that you follow the conversation a bit closer. Jed was referring to the smart meter, as was I.

Quote from Wyttenbach

@THH: Your level of eloquence is going deep down (below) the street.

If you argue, that a comment is biased without telling why it is biassed, then your comment is (biased)²...

I ask the mods to close this thread and to open a new one covering the Jury trial.

Display More

Wytt, you have a problem with your browser.

THHs post did not just say that a comment was biased without telling why.

There was more which you obviously missed.

(eg. "I refer you" plus about 12 more lines of detailed writing)

Can I suggest upgrading to the latest version of Google Chrome (Version 57.0.2987.133 (64-bit)).

Or maybe try Firefox, Safari, Edge etc.

It will help you avoid embarrassing posts such as the one you just made.

Good luck with the upgrade

Pete

And admins,

Maybe please don't close this thread yet.

Just because ONE user is having issues with the delivery of the content.

Thx