guest111 Member
  • Member since Mar 29th 2017
  • Last Activity:

Posts by guest111

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from IH Fanboy


    Not if Rossi elected "non-publication" on his non-provisionals, which based on his granted patent, it would seem that is what he favors. You will never have access to any information from the USPTO unless the patent is eventually granted. Nothing. No non-provisional application numbers. No inventor information. No titles. Nothing.

    Obviously if the patent application is not published, the reference isn't published, thank you for the continued nit-picking the obvious. The salient verifiable fact remains that in 7+ years (and prior), Rossi has not ANY granted patents, except his "Water Heater" patent (despite that long list of "provisionals" which can contain ANY gibberish, they are not examined at all) again yet another phantom unverifiable Rossisays of his reams of invisible IP (he and the Brethren have so many unverifiable invisible phantom claims it's difficult to count). Seems a couple of those would have worked their way thru in 8 years and resulted in some salient granted patent--if they were of any value and were pursued. The world then can only wait in suspense yet longer to see if the suppositions are true that his pipeline of IP will start gushing out patents, and if his national security "IP" was nabbed and squelched by the government (or as has been put forward, by other industry conspiracy), and for QuackX's to start rolling off the phantom factory automated assembly lines.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    That's rich, you complain about insults then call people sociopaths (that's Brethren-Logic for you). Saying one is "ignorant" about a technicality was not an insult, nor intended as one, it simply means one lacks knowledge. You again threw out random speculation and conspiracy theories, without even reading posts where that information to the contrary was repeated over and over, hmmm what is that generally called,,, a TROLL?


    PS. It is good to know that among your talents are Online Clairvoyant Psychiatric Analyst (is that a degree from Kensington "University" also?), I'm sure you will be receiving a deluge of emails requesting your diagnoses and medical skills.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    You ought not to try and deflect. What you said was flat out wrong. Best to say something like "I stand corrected" and move on. That approach is more classy and actually increases your cred. Yes, you must give actual notice to have a chance at recovering pre-grant damages. But the pre-grant damages do not ever date back to the filing date.

    You sir are the master of deflection, OK, I will explicitly state the obvious, that was WRONG, that obviously someone cannot infringe on something that they cannot be aware of. Does that make you feel better, make your day, like the spelling police trolls on the internet, when it has nothing to do with the conversation in the first place.

    That "list" of provisionals (and some undefined) goes back to 2010, and if ANY of them was ever converted to a real non-provisional (US or EU), those non-provisional would be searchable as well as the provisional reference. So, in 7 years, not one was worth incorporating into a real patent--very strange if there is any value in any of them. There is no tangible evidence of any other "Rossi IP", other than his granted Water-Heater patent, that is the proven FACT. Just like everything else of Rossi and your claims/speculations, the rest is unproven, invisible, wild speculation, while common logic and practice dictates otherwise against your "speculations"--just like the phantom IP, phantom Heat exchangers, phantom companies, etc etc. I suppose the world will have to wait yet another decade or so to see if your fanciful suppositions of top-secret government IP restrictions (while Rossi at the same time hawks the same "IP"), and master ingenious counter-intuitive and generally accepted negligent "Rossi IP" strategies materialize, and QuackX's humming in factories and homes. Perhaps the greatest invention of the century is being foolhardily kept as a trade-secret (the only plausible explanation, IF there was anything of value), but the world will check back with you in ANOTHER few years as they anxiously await the QuackX availability . Since, in the end, the only argument the Rossi Brethren regress to is : Rossi and we will not provide any rigid scientific proof, or independent testing, because the world would not believe it, they will only be assimilated into the Rossi-Bretrhen when they see QuackX's being sold in HD.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    To be clear, that isn't per my note above. Any pre-grant damages don't go all the way back to the filing date. They only go back to the publishing date. But yes, they are somewhat "theoretical" as they are hard to get.



    Rossi's granted U.S. patent never published as an application, which means he requested the "do not publish" option. That he did it here means he probably has done it with other pending non-provisionals. There is also the possibility that secrecy orders have been slapped on one or more of his applications.

    Any "do not publish" requests do not make the application number, inventor, and other data "invisible" in the USPTO database. Also, he could not file a given patent application in other countries with a "do not publish" status (what's the wizard's grand plan on that, not very smart it would seem). As to the possibility of the government slapping secret "national security" status on reams of secret Rossi-applications, well I'll admit there's a possibility that pigs will fly also (and he would/could not be publicly demonstrating selling/licensing same/related, and he could still provide certain non-revealing documentation of that circumstance). Again FACT remains that his only granted patent, after umpteen years, is for the Hotdog Cooker.


    Also to your first point, to be more specific, any potential pre-grant damages would go back to the date the party was specifically made aware by some means from the applicant that there was a pending application.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from ele

    Interesting but the link to the google drive does not work.

    I'm not sure if that list is correct. I presume that many titles could be invented and false.

    Quite weird that even for patents titles that should be public don't appear in major patents archives (espacenet, uspto).


    Alan are you sure that this is a list or real patents ?

    As stated those are described as PROVISIONAL patents (and the prefix numbers are indicative of "provisional" applications) , they are discarded by the USPTO after one year unless they are referenced in a NON-provisional patent filing; since they are not examined at all, the documents and numbers go in the trash after one year--there is no record of abandoned provisional patents kept at the USPTO. If ANYTHING is actually filed as a NON-provisional application, there would be a record of them (whether granted, abandoned, in-process or otherwise) and application numbers, under Rossi's name as inventor (even if it was assigned to Leonardo, or fake JMP as it were). Please read the posts or do some homework before slinging your responses, you are showing ignorance and bias by "presuming" they are "invented and false", unless you were referring to them as invented and false by Rossi--in that case it is highly likely you are correct.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    While I agree with you that a series of provisionals for the same invention is a poor strategy, I disagree that pending patent applications are worth nothing. Most startups will not get funding until they have at least one patent pending. The rights haven't fully matured in a pending patent application, but there are some semblance of rights that exist, including the priority date that has been secured, and the possibility of pre-grant damages reaching as far back to the date the patent application publishes. You'll notice in the long list of patent applications provided in the court exhibit, many show the application number as "unknown." The unknown ones might be the non-provisionals.

    I will revise my statement to "worth next to nothing, and worth nothing unless followed up promptly with a non-provisional". Conditions to get any pre-grant damages are very strict. Also as related above all those provisionals can only claim their specific filing date (max of one year, since they are abandoned after one year), they cannot reference the prior duplicate (triplicate etc) dates as described above, and are subject to someone filing an application that usurps them--which is a negligent IP "strategy"--if one had anything of any value. Per your note above, if those were actually filed as non-provisional, any potential damages could possibly go all the way back to the filing date of the first provisional, and the patent, and related patents protected to that date.


    Patent damages must be proven by real accounting and sales records, and/or expert analysis of lost revenue (one reason it's so expensive to prove damages in most cases), there is no thing such as "punitive" damages (unless fraud/intentional infringement was committed, but that's a different case).


    If the "unknown" Rossi-applications were non-provisionals, they would be on record at the patent office and public record, even if abandoned. And the patent numbers would still be available even if "do not publish" status was requested (which would be stupid because this dis-allows submitting the application in other countries). So, either bad record-keeping or just more Rossiganda.


    After all those years, hype and bluster, it remains a FACT, that Rossi has but one single granted "Water-Heater" (aka Hotdog Cooker) patent...not a very good IP track record. Again unless his "greatest invention" secret recipes are being kept as trade secrets...in which case he risks anyone patenting it from under him (which would be a foolhardy risk with the amounts theoretically at stake--if he actually had anything).


    PS. I am however still quite impressed/incredulous that he was able to get $11M for that "IP" and some crude plumbing scraps and heaters!

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from Alan Smith

    What is your point apart from being insulting to both me and other members?

    Alan, I apologize for the snarky reply. It was prompted by the monotonous claim/supposition of all the myriad of "IP" that Rossi has. Rossi has nothing other than a single granted "Water-Heater" patent, all the hand-waving over the above provisionals, non-granted applications as "invaluable IP" are worth nothing until/when/if pursued and granted. Perhaps the Wizard has all his secret recipes kept as trade secrets, and all the un-granted, abandoned, applications and provisionals are part of the genius' master-plan (in that unlikely event, then he'd better hope that no one files a patent on his trade-secrets, since he has no patent protection currently)...

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from [email protected]

    That might make sense if he later on gets to file the patent and it becomes effective from the later date.


    I had an idea for a bypass switch with timer on a kitchen smoke detector. It's annoying that the kitchen smoke detector keeps bleeping about some small cooking smoke. I checked the patent filings and sure enough, it had been patented in 1986. But there were no products in the market at the time (mid 1990's). Sure enough, after that patent expired I saw Home Depot carrying smoke detectors with that exact same feature. So it was more beneficial for Home Depot to wait for the patent to expire than move forward on that technology.


    Rossi could file all those patents today. 20 years from now they expire, and the big dogs start carrying that technology forward without paying a dime in royalties. In fact, a lot of LENR patents have already expired.

    It is not a professional or smart "strategy" in general, much less for "IP" related to the "greatest invention of the century". Priority dates are extremely important in many ways on patents, and related patents, continuations, etc. which reference each other. Giving up provisional patent application filing dates is risky since one can lose all patent rights to an invention, whether they were first to invent or not. Normally one would only do this (on serious patents), if one simply could not afford to file non-provisional patents (or, under Rossi conditions, too cheap, knows the applications are junk and only for propaganda are other reasons). Also, if anything related is publicly demonstrated that is also no longer patentable after 1 year. Most often, provisional patents are filed in ORDER to get a priority date, and have time to more thoroughly search prior art to see if it is actually worth pursuing, many are simply dropped and never resubmitted because prior art is found.

    Risks of filing multiple provisional patents include but not limited to:

    • Risk of Losing Your Patent Rights. ***A second (or third or fourth...) provisional patent application cannot claim priority to the first provisional patent application’s filing date like a non-provisional can***. Under the first to file system implemented by the United States in, 2013, losing your earlier filing date for the first provisional application could result in the loss of your patent rights in one or more of the following scenarios:
      • 3rd Party Files Before Your 2nd Provisional Filing Date. If a third-party files a patent application (provisional or non-provisional) before your second provisional patent application for the same invention, the third-party will be entitled to the patent on the invention (even if you were the first to invent).
         
      • 3rd Party Files After Your 2nd Provisional Filing Date. If you file a second provisional patent application that does not fully disclose your invention, a 3rd party can potentially file a patent application after even your second provisional patent application to acquire superior rights to your invention since you are only entitled to a filing date for subject matter fully disclosed. This is why it is prudent even with your first provisional patent non-provisional patent application filed sooner than later.
         
      • 3rd Party Publicly Discloses Invention Before Your 2nd Provisional Filing Date. If a third-party publicly discloses the invention before your second provisional patent application’s filing date, the prior public disclosure will (1) prevent you from receiving a patent and (2) entitle the third-party to receive a patent if they file a timely patent application within one-year of their first public disclosure.
         
    • Delayed Patent Rights. By filing a second provisional patent application instead of a non-provisional patent application, you are delaying examination of your patent application another year since a provisional patent application is not examined (the average pendency of a non-provisional patent application is approximately 30 months – by filing two consecutive provisional applications this pendency period is effectively increased to 54 months).
    • Lose Right to Stay on Old “First to Invent” System. If your first provisional patent application was filed before March 16, 2013, any non-provisional patent application that claims priority to the same subject matter is entitled to the “first to invent” system that existed prior to the March 16, 2013 change to a first to file system. This can be important if you have an early invention date that could help you get around other patent references. However, if you allow your first provisional patent application to expire and file a second provisional with a filing date on or after March 16, 2013, the patent application will be examined under the new first to file system and not the old first to invent system.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from can

    guest111

    I have little idea why he would choose this sort of strategy. It looks as if he's trying to delay filing non-provisional patent applications as much as he can, while keeping some sort of advantage (up to 1 year) in case he feels he is forced to for whatever reason. Maybe he prefers the information to be kept secret at the cost of patent protection.

    Or it's all just a bunch of garbage that even Rossi knows will never be granted any patents, or he is too cheap to file non-provisionals (at thousands each in attorney and PTO fees). I would bet on the former, and the latter is just icing (he knows funds are better spent on condos and toupees. Filing patents on one of the greatest inventions of the century, surely must be a lower priority over condos and toupees.).

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from can

    guest111

    In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't defending Rossi.


    Rossi's "trick" is that he lets his provisional patent applications expire only to file them again as provisional, year after year. This is clear once you sort that list by patent title or filing date. That way, Rossi gets to never publish them unless really necessary. In the documentation of the world application for the US-granted "Fluid Heater" patent there is an example of such provisional patents. This one in particular isn't in the IPH-provided list (which is "non-exhaustive").

    Thank you, yes I understood. Well, that Rossi- "strategy" (like the "Rossi-Effect" he likes to hear himself repeat) is negligent from any competent IP strategy, since his not filing non-provisionals year after year would be considered to be severe lack of due-diligence and put him at a disadvantage in any patent dispute (of course, this is assuming that all his "applications" are not just jibberish and propaganda for his Brethren in the first place, which is a poor assumption).

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from can

    From the document where that list was retrieved:

    Non-provisional applications ARE published 18 months after filing. Again, that gibberish list of provisional are thrown in the trash, along with the numbers by the UPSTO after one year unless a non-provisional is filed based on the content of the provisional. Priority date is lost from the provisional, and since the world is now "first to file" anyhow, there is nothing Rossi could argue from his (abandoned) provisionals. Gibberish and propaganda by Rossi and Brethren. Rossi has one single granted patent on a Water-Heater (aks Hotdog Cooker).

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    What is your point, those are a bunch of provisional applications that were never even filed as non-provisionals, much less anything granted. A provisional patent can be filed on ANYTHING (for a couple-hundred bucks), the patent office does NOT even examine a provisional application, and they EXPIRE after 1 year unless a non-provisional is filed, and are not published because they are not examined and considered abandoned. The priority date is also lost, so apparently the gibberish list wasn't useful enough to even file a non-provisional patent (within the 1 year or many years after) and if anyone came up with any of these "ideas", Rossi has no protection. (notwithstanding if there was any dispute, abandoning provisionals shows no due-diligence in protecting the invention and thus will generally be regarded by the patent office as abandonment by the filer of a provisional). What is your point, just more propaganda to the uninformed Brethren, that the dear moderator seems to foster. Rossi's "IP" remains his single Hotdog-Cooker patent, despite the gibberish above.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from SSC

    You are really biased, you transform things so they can fit with your distorted vision. It is obvious that when Rossi denounced IH he hoped to be able to get both the money and the IP, but over time he realized that it was safer to bet on one of the two because when it comes to dealing with a jury you can never be certain of the outcome even if you are right. It was Rossi's lawyer who asked him what was the most important for him, and he responded "the IP". Then the lawyer suggested the settlement because it was the safest way to get the IP. When you will see the first QuarkX on sale you will understand why the IP was worth more that the money... or maybe you will not understand it anyway, because people like you will continue to hate Rossi and say that the E-Cat doesn't work even when they will get one in their house that heats their bottom.

    Naa, I don't hate Rossi, at this point I find his and his Brethren's escapades quite amusing, better than anything on television (Wizard of OZ, Bernie Madoff Story, etc), and I look forward to the QuackX Episode, replete with its Rube Rossiburg "reactors", contaminated scrap plumbing, toggleclamps, heaters, arc-lamps, etc. and all the "analytical" instrumentation spitting out readings of astronomical COP's, with the Wizard, errr Rossi, pulling all the levers and pushing all the buttons....can't wait!!!!! (Albeit I probably wouldn't be so amused (I am however admittedly somewhat jealous, knowing what real innovators go thru to finance legitimate ventures) if I was the one that handed over $11M to him.....). An EDog may indeed heat one's bottom, but only with a COP<1.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Rossi will have to wait to go down in the annals with the likes of Bernie, et.al., which indeed would have been the case if his bold attempt to extract another $89M by suing the folks that he'd already extracted $11M from had succeeded. Too bad he tucked his tail and ran like a scalded ECat when his bluff was called, people would have liked to have seen that proceed in court. But, NOW we are informed by the Brethren, that Rossi's grand ingenious plot all along was simply to get his Water Heater IP back, and be free to work on the QuackX. So now humanity must wait with bated breath for the opening of the QuackX Show, and to disconnect from the grid for a fraction of the energy prices they're paying now with a Quackx, made by the millions in invisible robotic factories, humming away in the closet, zero emissions and waste....while plasma-glowing fluorescent pigs and unicorns dart through the sky.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Ostensibly, IH would be the only person harmed by any Rossi fraud, they would be the party to file suit if they so wished; but, seeinzhow, aside from more attorney's fees and bad publicity, they lost their money due to negligently poor due-diligence, on an astronomical "bet" in the first place, they'd probably have a hard time clawing back a lot or a jury having a whole lot of sympathy--the shareholders should be the ones ticked off, if anyone. Florida or the government has no interest, and no one else is harmed, unless Rossi is out publicly soliciting for new suck....err, investors. And yes, Florida is the fraud capital of the US, with all healthcare and insurance scams, many (barely) legal, and others illegal.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    Ah yes, there is much hypocrisy here. When the I-hate-Rossi crowd began attacking Rossi on possibly not paying his taxes that were due, I questioned how many here have kept track of their online purchases over the years (during the decade when online companies didn't collect sales taxes), and report those purchases to the appropriate state taxing authorities. Crickets. Because nobody here did that, all in violation of tax laws. Ever sold something through the classifieds or Craiglist? Did you track the basis in your property and pay the appropriate capital gains taxes on those as well? I would venture to guess: nope. What about a barter? Have you ever bartered anything? Did you track the basis in the bartered item and pay the appropriate capital gains due on that as well? Nope. Have you traded a service for another service? Did you pay the appropriate income tax on the value of the services received? Doubtful. Hypocrites.

    (Another) typical Brethren moral-non-equivalency argument; a person not tracking and reporting sales tax on a handful of items, is the same as someone not paying income taxes on millions of income. Licensing revenues frequently get hit particularly hard also. State and federal government will tax ill-gotten gains, as well as legitimate ones, so either way, it's almost certain that the state and federal government tax authorities know about Rossi after all the legal actions, and of course IH reported all those payments on THEIR taxes also. Maybe Rossi will now turn around and sue the state and federal gov that all the $11M should be tax-exempt because he is using it to save humanity and giving it away to kids with cancer (with a few condos and toupees thrown in).

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from SSC

    Rossi has never commented on the process, he has always abstained from expressing any opinion about it. Only after the settlement Rossi granted two interviews, the first of which was with Mats Lewan, and only in this case he explained his point of view:

    "So my lawyers asked me before the trial which my priorities were if the trial would lead to any transactions—those indispensable and those negotiable. My answer was that the indispensable condition was to get the license back because I didn’t want to collaborate with IH anymore." (https://animpossibleinvention.…-was-rossis-top-priority/)

    Obviously, he would not be sorry to get both the money for the test and the IP, but when he was forced to choose, he preferred to be sure to get back his IP. So Rossi did not re-write anything: you're the one who wants to read things in a way that makes you more enjoyable.

    So, why are the Rossi Brethren so critical of IH; in the Rossi Brethren's new and improved perspective (since he turned tail and ran like a scalded E-Dog when his $89M bluff was called (the Brethren DO recall that Rossi brought suit)) , regardless, he got everything he wanted, his HotDog Cooker IP back and ~$11M from IH, and now he will be coming out with QuackX's to save humanity--there's no logic like Brethren logic.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    It is an absolute

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    Real science doesn't carve out reputation traps for areas of research involving intriguing results, particularly when the potential upside to humanity far outweighs any potential negatives that might come about by devoting some resources to further clarify those results.

    That IH money would have been 11 million times more effective in providing any return to humanity, in any area, than if given to virtually any "cause" other than Rossi-- that is indeed a shame.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Jed, that's true as well, I wasn't discounting their engineering, nor implying the "stumbled" on their work, and their customary use of "mathematical smokescreens" and experimentation (as the Rossi Brethren say), I was just stating that the issues, skills and resources required in developing and testing atomic physics are vastly different.

  • Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

    Quote from axil

    As they say in science fiction movies, Rossi's work is beyond the combined resources of all the Earth's physical science. That statement should fire up the trolls.

    haa, no not at all (I presume you consider me a troll), that's the best chuckle of the day (even if only a trifle of that hyperbole was serious) !!! Thank you!