Guest New Member
  • Member since Apr 8th 2016
  • Last Activity:

Posts by Guest

    194 does not appear abandoned - it is on the slate for a 4/20 hearing with the magistrate per doc 232.


    It was previously ruled improper (along with Rossi's motion for sanctions) in doc 216, with the comment that both motions/disputes should first be raised with magistrate, and only then filed as a motion either at direction of magistrate or as an appeal of magistrate's decision.

    Not sure that it has been fully pointed out before, or at least not with all dots connected, but "Florida Energy Trust" appears to be the smoking gun showing financial ties between Rossi and Fulvio Fabiani / USQL.


    In exhibit 238 - 45, page 50, Rossi states that Leonardo Florida is officially owned by "Florida Energy Trust", and that he is the sole benificiary:


    Meanwhile, a search of the Florida Dept of State website for corporate records shows that "Florida Energy Trust" is an equal manager (along with Fabiani) of USQL

    (Sunbiz USQL filing)


    Again, add this to the heap of evidence of strong ties between those 2 (particularly Fabiani's testimony that he's extremely close with Rossi's wife), but this again shows a vehicle for financial co-mingling.


    I know some don't like this connection being mentioned, but given that Rossi is directly financial linked to USQL, it does make it even more questionable (at least as far as appearances go) for USQL to have made financial contributions that either benefited Levi or at least supported his work (the donation to fund "pinball thesis" research @ UNIBO) .

    Oh come on...


    We know nothing of the sort. It appears Rossi told Bass that he was cooking platinum sponges, but Bass clearly has no clue what is going on (if anything) at the facility and is simply asking Rossi what he is supposed to say.


    And the invoice for nickel powder was just a camouflaged payment for tax preparation fees incurred by JM that Rossi didn't want it to be known that he was paying for (read the email - there was no nickel powder).


    Pure theater.


    Most likely is that there is absolutely nothing going on there...

    Per document 93:


    "Third-Party Defendant, J.M. Products, Inc., hereby certifies that there is no parent corporation of J.M. Products, Inc."



    Confirmed that Johnson's letter to IH asserting there was a british parent company was a lie, straight from the mouth of JM. What a clear admission of all of this being an attempt at manipulation and fraud.


    How can Rossi & Johnson possibly get out of this now?

    @Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax


    Abd - we're counting on you! Are you planning on uploading the new document associated with:


    MOTION to Strike Affirmative Defenses , MOTION for More Definite Statement by Leonardo Corporation, Andrea Rossi. Responses due by 9/16/2016 (Annesser, John)


    That just showed up on PACERMONITOR?


    Don't see it on New Vortex yet.


    Thank you in advance for feeding our needs :)

    @Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax


    You posed the question:


    I really wonder ... who was paying those power invoices? Where did that money come from?


    Not sure if you noticed, but I believe IH may have put into question whether they were ever actually paid that money (and Rossi never actually claimed they were paid it, just that it had been agreed they would be paid).


    Here's the relevant claim from Rossi's original suit:


    Quote

    64. On or before August 13,2014, ROSSI and LEONARDO located a customer in
    Miami, Florida, who agreed to allow its facility to be used for the Guaranteed Performance Test
    and even agreed to pay IH up to One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for the energy
    produced by the E-Cat Unit during the Guaranteed Performance Test.


    And here's IH's response:


    Quote

    64. Defendants deny that the “test” referenced in Paragraph 64 – meaning the operation of the Plant in Doral, Florida in 2015 and early 2016 – was the “Guaranteed Performance” to be performed under the License Agreement. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph 64 as to Plaintiffs locating a customer in Miami, Florida who agreed to allow its facility to be used for a “Guaranteed Performance” test. The company Plaintiffs “located” for Case 1:16-cv-21199-CMA Document 29 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/06/2016 Page 12 of 66 - 12 - the test referenced in Paragraph 64 was a company closely affiliated with Plaintiffs (J.M. Products, Inc.) that had no actual use for the steam produced by the Plant, and thus was not a “customer” for the steam power to be produced by the Plant. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 64.


    Emphasis added is my own.


    We do know from exhibits 17 & 18 that there was an agreement in place for IH to get paid, but whether those payments were ever actually made to IH might still be to be determined.

    Alan - I believe Abd hits the nail on the head (with one clarification/distinction).


    It sounds like all parties would agree that Fulvio Fabiani was technically a "contractor" for IH (Mats reported that Fulvio submitted invoices to IH for payment), which has some differences from an "employee".


    Regardless, as Abd points out, being a contractor (or even an employee) does not necessarily mean that person is approved/recognized to be a "representative" of that company in all circumstances (in this context - just because FF had bills paid by IH does not meant that IH would feel comfortable with FF being the only IH-affiliate with access to/oversight of the test).


    Will see what they say in the next week...

    Fabiani is often mentioned by Rossi as an IH employee, which technically he was. But he came from Rossi. Not knowing the history enough, I have no idea if there would be any basis for a cross-complaint against Fabiani. My guess is, no. But he may be subpoenaed as a witness (by either side).



    I would certainly expect Fabiani to be called at least as a witness given that he is explicitly mentioned in Rossi's lawsuit as being IH's representative during the test (a misrepresentation according to Dewey Weaver and others).


    Given that Fulvio Fabiani continues to live in a unit owned by Rossi just a couple floors below Rossi's own unit, and that he and Rossi continue to have an ongoing business relationship through USQL LLC, where Rossi is his silent partner through an entity called "Florida Energy Trust", if there was any funny business during the test it's almost certain that Fulvio was complicit.


    I wonder whether there might be an even closer, potentially familial relationship between Fabiani and Rossi given that Rossi appears to have given him an apartment in the same building where he and his in-laws live.

    Has anyone actually looked at the timeline of events?


    Sifferkoll (& Rossi) have made several statements to the following effect:


    IH were happy to recieve the 1st, 2nd, 3rd quarterly ERV reports. They used them to raise at least $50M from Woodford.


    However, per documents linked in other threads on this site the Woodford investment in IH was finalized/signed in early May 2015. The "test" didn't start until late Feb 2015 (per Rossi's suit).


    Therefore, Woodford's investment was finalized before any interim report would have been available, and it is highly likely that terms of the investment had been negotiated before the test even kicked off. They did not invest based on anything connected to Rossi's 1-year "test" (at least not any results), the timeline doesn't work.


    I think Jed is also accurate in reporting that IH had concerns/issues with the test set-up and Rossi's actions during the test period, and I'm guessing there will be a formal paper trail confirming these concerns that will be part of IH's legal response.

    Legally, not clear. That is a matter that must be determined in court, as IH has legally moved to have Rossi's claims dismissed and the contract recognized as valid yet unfulfilled by Rossi.


    You post a lot of these types of comments that really don't contribute much to the community's understanding. They are baiting comments, in the guise of questions but clearly designed to be statements that will generate much of the divisive debate that has swamped these boards.


    Can we all just stop playing armchair lawyer, wait for the issue to be settled in court, and move on to other conversations that might be useful?

    Why hasn't anyone brought this up - if you seriously believe it plausible that the "customer" was so concerned about IH being able to learn their industrial secrets via a brief trip behind the partition, why would that same "customer" be comfortable with Rossi having his own key to their space and 24-hour unsupervised access to it?


    It's not logical.


    If they were SO paranoid that a simple glance from IH would reveal all of their secrets, don't you think they would have the same fear about Rossi?


    Why would the "customer" have so much mistrust towards IH but not towards Rossi? And we're also supposed to believe that Rossi had no prior connection to this "customer" other than randomly sharing the same lawyer/president? How can both of those suppositions coexist logically?

    I really don't understand how anyone at this point can still believe that Fulvio Fabiani is an "IH guy" and not Rossi's right-hand man simply because Rossi describes him as such.


    Fulvio literally lives in one of the condos Rossi bought with the funds from IH, 2 floors down from Rossi himself.


    Some also point to the fact that he's moved on to a new company, USQL LLC, as some kind of evidence that he's distanced from the situation.


    But even the tiniest bit of searching on sunbiz.org shows Rossi is Fabio's silent partner in USQL through an entity named "Florida Energy Trust" whose mailing address is Rossi's condo, so they are still in business together today.

    Can the moderators please get on the same page?


    @ Rigel


    Here are no rules, it is a playground build up as a reaction of the endless in circles rotating and thus pointless debates here in the forum, where in principle the only aim is to discredit the debaters through unsubstantiated personal attacks. If you what to do this, or if you like it, or need it (there are people out there you have such desires) then come over here to the playground, but do not complain.


    vs.


    There are ALWAYS forum rules. This thread is merely meant to be a little bit more relaxed about applying them. Which it is.



    Use downvotes if you wish, but deleting the comments makes it difficult for those who aren't constantly refreshing the thread to see what has been said, follow along with the dialogue, and make their own determination of what actually crosses the line. The only exception should be if people start posting threatening or potentially threatening comments.

    @Dewey Weaver


    FrankWTU has explicitly stated that he is not Frank A from ECW.


    Alan Smith (a moderator with access to all user's registered email addresses) also tried to correct you on this matter with his statement about "barking up a gumtree", which appears to be the UK equivalent to the US phrase "barking up the wrong tree".


    So I think that is fully put to rest, and a reminder that we should all be careful jumping to conclusions.