Leonardo/Industrial Heat Court Case on "Complex Track" — to go to Jury Trial in September 2017 (Rossi: Effect on E-Cat Commercial "None")

Thanks to Sifferkoll for providing links to the latest court documents in the Rossi/Industrial Heat court case.

Andrea Rossi has gotten what he requested so far — the court case has not been dismissed as requested by Industrial Heat, and it will go to a jury trial.

However there will be a long time to wait until a resolution of this case (unless there is a settlement out of court) as the trial is scheduled to begin on September 17, 2017 (see here)

This document states that the decision has been made to put the case into a “Complex Track”, because of “(a) the number of potential witnesses, and (b) the novelty and complexity of some factual issues which will require expert engineering and scientific testimony, (c) the likelihood of taking depositions in foreign jurisdictions and (d) the likelihood that the trial in this cause will last more than ten (10) days”

Links to the latest documents can be found at Sifferkoll.com here: http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/new-court-documents-on-pacermonitor/

This year+ long wait will give plenty of time for research and discovery on both sides, and for endless speculation for outsiders! I don’t expect that Andrea Rossi will be slowing down his work on the QuarkX and commercialization of the E-Cat plants. Maybe the delay will be a welcome lift of pressure for him. It sounds possible now that we won’t get to see the ERV report from the 1MW plant test until next year at the earliest!


A few more pertinent quotes from this court document:

“Although the parties are open to discussing settlement, at this stage of the proceedings settlement appears unlikely”

“It is possible that additional parties might be added to this case if Defendents file counterclaims and/or third party claims.” (Maybe IH will be cooperating with other aggrieved parties who wish to take legal action against Rossi/Leonardo)

“The parties contemplate submitting to the court a proposed protective order providing for the confidentiality of certain documents and information exchanged in discovery, and further contemplate negotiation and electronic discovery protocol to govern the exchange of electronic discovery.” (this would probably cover the ERV report)

“As of the time of this report, Defendants have yet to file an answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and may elect to file counterclaims and/or third party claims if required to answer the Complaint” (It sounds from this that IH are thinking about responding to Rossi’s complaint with a counter-suit if they are ordered to respond by the judge)

UPDATE (July 1, 2016)

I asked Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, “What effect does delaying the start of the trial until September 2017 have upon your plans to commercialize the E-Cats?”

His answer was: “none.”

  • artefact

    September 2017. Wow ๐Ÿ™‚

    • MasterBlaster7

      I think that is about standard for a case like this…pray it doesn’t last 20 years.

  • Brokeeper

    If on schedule, as Rossi hopes, I doubt the 1MW plant report will have as much weight by then considering many plants will have been operating for months with customers’ blessings. I believe the battle, if not resolved before then, will revolve around the original IP contract verbiage as to IH’s usage rights. Then the jury will have to decide.
    I agree, because of the long wait time, Rossi will come out of this very well by end of next year.

  • MasterBlaster7

    See. It is exactly legal time scales like these that I say focus on Rossi’s Leonardo production and Rossi’s Leonardo distribution in Europe. Also, any new investors in Leonardo. Because, following this case…that way madness lies. I was pulling my hair out just waiting for the 1 year test to end….this legal case is 20 times worse.

  • bfast

    Man, can I sit on the jury? I’d love to use up my jury duty service on such an interesting topic!

    • DrD

      Hehe, can we ask questions, can we cross examine all the witnesses?

    • Brokeeper

      You will automatically be excluded, Sorry. ๐Ÿ™

  • BillH

    If IH really wanted to slow things down then AR has played right into their hands. Not withstanding Leonardo Corp statement that the LA has been dissolved it is very likely that IH will block any attempt to launch product into any markets which they still believe they have an exclusive agreement to produce in. That will include Xs and Quarks.

    • Fedir Mykhaylov

      It seems to me that the Industrial heat wants to get back his $ 10 million, and does not want any quarks …

    • Engineer48

      Hi Bill,

      The License Agreement has not been dissolved. What Rossi did was to trigger the termination events, which prevent IP from using the IP and from engaging in any business against Rossi for a VERY long time. The License Agreement is still in effect and binding on all parties.

  • Ophelia Rump

    I don’t think we will “hear” about any sales and manufacturing actually taking place in the disputed regions until after the trial. What happens under NDA can be an entire industry. For either or both sides.

  • help_lenr

    Seems now that the MTD not rejected as yet, but (unless MTD accepted) the deadline of 17 September 2017 as start actual jury process remains

  • akupaku

    A question to Engineer48:

    I think you said earlier that your potential clients for the 1MW reactors intend to wait until the legal issues are resolved. Does this now mean that they will not buy any test reactors from Leonardo until the court case is over some time late 2017 or even 2018?

    How does this affect your other plans to use Rossi/Leonardo reactors?

    It seems likely and logical to me that IH will try to block any sales in the markets that it had (or still has?) so Leonardo might only be able to sell in its original markets in Europe etc.

    • Fedir Mykhaylov

      f quark’s the real thing no one bothers her to certify and release under the guise of an electric heater or spotlight. Apparently Industrial Heat has no claim to the creation of quark’s.

    • Omega Z

      If Rossi puts a product on the market that proves beyond doubt to do just half what he claims, I would think the court case would explode in Rossi’s favor before ever going to court.

      However, If there was a concern of selling in the U.S. or a court ordered injunction preventing U.S. sales, One could easily go to Europe and by a system then have it shipped back.

      Note: Years ago, a Contractor found that Caterpillar tractor inc was selling a specific tractor for about 1/3rd the U.S. price through a Russian distributor. The distributor wasn’t allowed to sell product outside it’s market zone nor would Caterpillar give the Contractor a discount. The Contractor flew to Russia, purchased the tractor and had it shipped to the U.S.. All said, the Contractor saved about 50% after all expenses.

      • DrD

        True I suppose.
        It used to work like that for UK. We could buy German or French cars at a huge reduction and import them. It was messy and at first we had to have the steering wheel on the wrong side. Then some individuals set up in business doing just that and managed to get them with right hand drive.

      • MasterBlaster7

        “proves beyond doubt”….I think you mean “proves beyond a reasonable doubt” Omega. And, that is not necessary here. The “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard is 85% ish likely to be true and used in criminal cases…not civil. With Rossi’s reactor…for this case….it would be “preponderance of the evidence”….which is 51% ish likely to be true.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Well, in the case of some tractor, or even โ€œgrayโ€ electronic products it can be hard to stop and control the flow of such products into other jurisdictions. Usually the manufacture or head company will cancel the dealership of who is selling outside of their jurisdiction. For
        some time, Canadian auto dealers were selling products into the USA, but the major automakers threatened such dealers with losing their dealerships. The result was dealers stopped selling new cars, but tons of lease backs etc. still continued going south to the USA.

        In the case of IH, they could likely have some kind of injunction โ€“ the customs people would likely respect such a request for imported products.

        So IH could likely stop such devices coming into the country. This also may explain why Rossi building a plant in the USA.

        Perhaps the Europe manufacturing going to be the Quark-X, and thus this might circumvent the USA license restrictions that are currently tied up in court.

        And if the court case were to go in favor of IH, then they could claim compensation for any device that Rossi sells into their marketplace.

        It would seem Rossi does not care either way.

        I do agree with many here stating that โ€œifโ€ Rossi can start selling devices before the court date, then that act does strengthen his position. This would force IH to fight for their distribution and market rights in court. While perhaps not the best case for Rossi, it certainly would be great for the public since then IH would in public be conceding that
        LENR and the ecat works.

        Of course if Rossi start selling ecats, then the court case is only a legal matter โ€“ not one of commercial LENR products existing and for sale.

        I am betting that most readers here care little about the court case, but care GREATLY about LENR products being sold. That day in which a customer can purchase a LENR device will be a historic and great day indeed!

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Omega Z

          In the above situation, Caterpillar was lucky to have a distributor in Russia. It was shortly after the wall came down. Politics played more into who your business distributors were.(cronyism was at play)

          The Contractor could have bought a cheaper competitors variant of the tractor(KOMATSU) and Cat would have lost more then a little profit. They could have lost the sale entirely. However, the Contractor preferred Caterpillar product and had options to obtain it.

          Obviously, there is no competitor in the E-cat situation, but there is national Television News networks. In a news conference, I announce I’ve purchased a product that can save my customers 75% or more on the utilitiy bills. But these jerks are preventing me from using my legally purchased product to do so. What does the public think???

          Obviously, Rossi needs a verified working product available 1st.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            The whole issue of โ€œpublicโ€ is a VERY powerful point. Rossi has been very smart to โ€œgatherโ€ an internet following, as it quite much means some PR firm canโ€™t roll over him in the public eye.

            I think any press announcement from a customer having purchased a working LENR device amounts to a loaded howitzer pointed at IH and the skeptical community in general.

            Such a PR game with working LENR devices is a huge poker hand that Rossi can play at any time (assuming Rossi is delivering working devices).

            Such a press release would result in a news and internet firestorm of the likes we not seen in a long time.

            Rossi may eventually want to unleash such a storm when he feels the timing is ripe.

            The delivery of working LENR devices is the birth and launch of a multi-trillion dollar industry. Behind the scenes, there has to be a ton of vested interests in the world that pray Rossi does not have what he claims.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Engineer48

      Hi Akupaku,

      The court has not yet dismissed the MTD, so taking of a trial is improper.

      I keep my potential client advised of how the legal situation is progressing. It is there call when they want to move forward.

      As for my Remote QuarkX powered plants, I will move forward as soon as Andrea gives me notice the reactors are ready to sign a purchase order.

      • MasterBlaster7

        Are you a lawyer Engineer48?

        • Engineer48

          Hi MB,

          Bush Lawyer who has seen both sides of a LOT of contracts and some that went very badly wrong.

          I do know, from painful experience, how we read contracts and how the courts read the same contract. Had to learn how to read contracts like the legal guys do to survive.

          • MasterBlaster7

            Ah good, finally, a lawyer. Couple of questions…

            1. What is your theory on why and how this all went down…and to what purpose? (both sides)

            2. What do you think the time scale on this is going to be. I see we have the 2017 date…but how do you think this will play out and what kind of time scales are we looking at? (pre-trial, trial, post-trial) Just want an educated guess here.

          • Engineer48

            Hi MB,

            My lay degree is from the schools of hard knocks.

            It went down because IH refused to oblige the payment conditions of clause 3.2c after the ERV deliver his report showing a COP > 50.

            The lawyers will drag this out as long as they can. It is a game called “Billable Hours” that all real lawyers very quickly learn to play.

          • William D. Fleming

            I think it will drag out until the opposing parties are broke and all their money is in the pockets of the lawyers.

          • Brokeeper

            The corruption level of a society is indirectly proportional to the number of lawyers it has. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Chapman

            NO WORRIES!

            “Rear-End” Concussions are the Worst! I had one myself, when I was a kid. I fell hard and broke my Bum. Seriously! Cracked it right down the middle… Damn thing still hasn’t healed back…

            (HA! That’s a Joke, Get it? See what I did there???)

            Keep posting, and don’t worry about corrections. Love having you here and nobody’s going to trash you over grammer. Thinking and Engaging here is good recuperative therapy.

            (Oh, and to be honest, I was not correcting you! I thought you were honoring the profession, which I understand – as we are a nation of Laws – and I was only posting a quip deriding the profession for conversation sake. You know, like “Q: What do you call a Hundred dead Lawyers in a pool? A: A Damn Good Start!!!”)

          • Brokeeper

            Haha! Thanks for your encouraging words. I enjoy
            your comments that are contributing much to this blog.

        • Fedir Mykhaylov

          After Rossi beat the dishes with Industrial heat technology, many engineers retrained into lawyer

    • Brokeeper

      This is the remote possibility I was thinking of by disrupting the E-cat sales in the US. But once customers in the European community start operating their plants, the attempts to slow production in US will lay PR consequences upon IH’s head.

  • Barbierir

    If half of what Dewey claimed is true we will see criminal charges against Rossi long before the trial. Now Dewey has gone silent and I got the strong feeling that no such charges will ever materialize. I also feel that IH will never release the report that is allegedly so damning for Rossi.

    • US_Citizen71

      I would be more worried about Darden going to jail for securities fraud.

      • MasterBlaster7

        Nah. I think this is ‘eventually’ going to be ruled a simple breach of contract. Darden wont have to pay the 89 million. Rossi will keep the 10 million…and get all of his licencing and distribution rights back.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I simply disagree, if IH can attack LENR credibility it can delay implementation, which is their goal.

    • roseland67

      Then give an Ecat to NASA, the overwhelming majority of people in The world would believe NASA and the overwhelming majority of the world have never even heard of IH, Darden, Cherokee etc.
      What IH says is worth less than 2 dead flies, NASA proves it either works as stated or it doesn’t,
      I believe this is what Rossi is worried about

      • Brokeeper

        Who is to say they haven’t either directly or via the DOD? What do you think NDA means?

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Right or wrong, Rossi looks at NASA as a competitor and for him would be like giving his undeveloped invention to GE for testing. He has also stated he believes strongly that free enterprise in the private sector is the best way to introduce LENR into the economy, unencumbered by government bureaucracy and lobbyists. I tend to agree with him after seeing how lobbyists can twist our elected government into knots to only benefit lobbyist clients.

      • HS61AF91

        NASA’s been making a lot of amazing discoveries lately. (deep oceans on Mars, lights within an large asteroid, millions of earth-like planets, etc.) Maybe LENR practicality is coming up as another one soon. Depends on unknown, but possible reasons, too vague to speculate on what the reasons are.

  • GiveADogABone

    The best and most credible witness by far is the 1MW plant itself. It is sitting there refuelled and ready to go, except for an evaporator[1:] as a load. The court should order it to be restarted with proper supervision and procedures. A few weeks of operation will soon show who is telling the truth and there is now plenty of time for that.

    [1:] http://www.matthey.com/sustainability/in-action/archive/2012_13_case_studies/reducing_the_use_of_critical_raw_materials
    ‘Steam from the boiler is used to concentrate the byproduct liquors’

    • wpj

      It’s the “multiple boil” products where the cost of these goes up considerably.

      At least by Sept 2017, the next reactors (assuming there are some) should have been operating for about a year at the client’s facility which could, potentially, be added as further proof (assuming that it does work). Also, they could ship the jury out there to see it in operation (or at least video it).

  • DrD

    Yes but what about the Jury though.

    • HS61AF91

      If the jury is ordinary folk, they’ll wind up saying screw the lawyers and find for Rossi. The more complex, the sooner! That’s my optimistic feeling of what will happen.

  • DrD

    That would be the best evidence the Jury could ask for but — sigh — will there be many with this hanging over half the world.

    • Omega Z

      It would only take 1 confirmed happy customer outside the original IH market.

  • DrD

    At least we now know that it isn’t simply a case of the Jury agreeing
    that the payment was contractually due once the agreed (jointly by both
    parties) ERV report is positive (amount depending on the COP).
    I think there was that thought being debated earlier but in reality It never was going to be so simple.
    What a mess!

  • Fedir Mykhaylov

    The success or failure of products Rossi issued on the market has no relation to litigation between Leonardo and Industrial heat

  • Chapman

    You are correct! Even the two week estimate came from the joint submission, good catch!

    My brain fixated on the nature and source of item B, and I then just filed the 10 day estimate as a calendar issue (my brain was still chewing on “B” and choked on “D”!), but this just reinforces the point of my post – which was that the statements quoted came from the parties themselves, not the Judge. I was making the observation that the references to scientific complexity and expert engineering analysis were not in any way a reflection of the opinions or intentions of the Judge.

    • MasterBlaster7

      Oh, silly me. I thought I read this article a day or 2 ago. Just saw that Rossi said the court case would have zero effect on commercialization…presumably in Europe.

      I guess the only question is…can he put together a factory for 10 million (if he can use that 10 million due to the court case) or is he going to need new outside investment.

      • Roland

        Though the involvement of ABB is inferential, at this point in time, ABB spends $1.5 billion a year on R&D and has an entire division dedicated to fostering and integrating smaller enterprises with relevant technologies into the corporation’s quest to maintain technical dominance across its various divisions.

        The assumption that Leonardo will restrict its efforts to Europe is directly contradicted by all the statements made to the courts and Leonardo/Rossi’s very public stance that the licenses previously granted to IH are null and void and that interested parties in those previous license areas should now directly contact Leonardo.

        Further, there is little or no reason to assume that the only financing to flow into Leonardo since 2012 has come from the $11.5 million provided by IH and that the total budget to commercialize and manufacture E-cats is, thereby, less than $10 million.

        As Engineer 48’s experience demonstrates, there are large commercial entities paying attention to the development of Rossi’s technologies and they are cognizant of the potential impacts on their enterprises.

        If IH committed to invest $100 million on the basis of the state of the E-cat in 2012 why should we assume that there is a lack of potential suitors given the apparent advances since then; if anything we could more readily envision a lineup waiting to pass the DD phase so that they can actively participate in the eminent restructuring of a $100 trillion business.

  • Brokeeper

    My optimism is calculated optimism. Optimism and reality are not necessary mutually exclusive. I share Andrea Rossi’s realistic viewpoint and LookMoo’s logic below. I know of only one remote chance that a wrench could be thrown in the works within the year.

  • Mark Underwood

    My feeling is that the court case is hardly tying up Rossi’s plans; he is still able to develop the Quark and get business rolling at least in Europe. I think in part Rossi’s suit against IH has to do with his competitive nature ; he feels IH is taking advantage of him and he will have none of it. But in the larger and more strategic picture, he wants to undo the relationship with IH and revoke their rights to using his IP in the geographically specific Licensing agreement. I think he will succeed. I predict the court will decide to revoke any rights of IH to Rossi’s IP. After all the relationship is no longer friendly, and clearly IH doesn’t seem to believe in the efficacy of Rossi’s IP anyway. However IH will not have to pay the $89M. Some victory to both sides.

    • MasterBlaster7

      Just a little addition…” I think in part Rossi’s suit against IH has to do with his competitive nature”….yes Rossi’s competitive nature but I think Rossi has grown a thick skin and very savvy having tangle with the BS of the Italian mafia. I think this move is propelled by learning from bitter business experience.

      • Brokeeper

        Yes, mega strength through fire and pressure – a diamond in the rough.

      • peacelovewoodstock

        Agreed, never, never underestimate the fortitude and determination of anyone who has run a marathon.

        • wpj

          Or for 24h

  • MasterBlaster7

    A “deadline” is a statement that tells me that people don’t know shit about the law in here haha.

    Seriously, Frank, could you do an interview with a lawyer who is familiar with cases like these….just to get an ‘opinioned’ timetable on how he/she thinks this would unfold? I remember reading a lawyers prognostication at the beginning of this suit and it helped, alot, to put things into perspective.

  • MasterBlaster7

    Oh, that is great news. Do you have a source on…”well Rossi claims that he will have his e-cats for sale before that date”…I would be interested to read that.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Walt,

    IH needs to prove to the jury that the ERV’s reported COP > 50 was actually 2.6 or less.

    Nothing else matters for that complaint.

    Also remember that back in 2013 IH paid Rossi $10m based on the ERV data for a 24 hour test showing a COP of 6 or greater for one of the individual small modular reactors.

    • GiveADogABone

      1: It is not possible to unknowingly run the E-cat with the water out of the gauge glass for multiple reasons.
      2: The superheated steam produced requires 2265kJ/kg for evaporation.
      3: Condensate production records from the production plant will produce evidence of the water flow rate in the 1MW E-cat. This number is believed to be at the 36m^3 per day level.
      4: The maximum capacity of the electrical supply is believed to be about the 300kW level.

      A simple calculation provides the minimum possible CoP and the number is at about the three level. Authorative numbers for the condensate flow rate and max elec supply are needed but these two numbers can provide a simple proof that is independent of the ERV report. If the ERV report states CoP>50 and the simple proof states CoP>3, then IH have a double problem with claiming CoP<2.6.

      IH have yet another problem in proving CoP<2.6. They have to construct a dataset that is totally consistent with reality. If the ERV report is consistent with reality, then the chances of constructing a false but consistent dataset based on CoP6 from a 24 test is in the public domain.

      If recently ordered E-cats start running in the timescales of the court, possibly at the factory of the production plant owner, that is yet another source of proof.

      I make that six separate ways to get a view of the possible, probable and actual CoPs. What evidence could IH produce to refute that lot? The only hint so far is that footnote in the MTD.

  • Brokeeper

    A 100W unplugged lightbulb lit 24/7 laying on a guarded courts table. ๐Ÿ™‚

  • peacelovewoodstock

    I don’t think Rossi will have to prove that LENR is “real”, he only needs to prove that he satisfied the terms of his agreement with IH. The agreement by IH basically said “we’ll pay you $89M if this EVR that we have agreed on reports that the eCat met the requirements of the test”. It seems clear that the EVR did report exactly that.

    IH’s primary argument is that the agreement was invalid (which argument is very, very weak and not likely to succeed IMHO).

    Their only possible defense I think is to “prove” that the EVR (that they approved) provided false information in the report, knowingly or otherwise.

    That could get into a lot of technical hair-splitting, but it would presumably be over the accuracy of instrumentation and measurements, and the accuracy with which information was recorded, and how it was analyzed and presented.

    • MasterBlaster7

      Well. If the ERV isn’t taken on face…Rossi might have to demonstrate the e-cat outputting 4-5 COP…or whatever the original contract for 89 million said. Ipso Facto proving LENR is real…with legal weight.

      • Engineer48

        HI MB,

        Rossi need to prove nothing.

        IH need to prove the ERV report was in error AND that the real COP was 2.6 or below.

        The $89m payment is a simple contract dispute and nothing more. Of course there are many other issues in the Rossi complaint.

      • Engineer48

        Hi MB,

        The ERV is a certified engineer for doing such work. IH agreed to use him twice and agreed to his report for the 1st 24 hour test that the COP was 6 or greater.

        Rossi will not need to prove anything. It is IH that needs to prove the ERV reported COP > 50 is not accurate.

        • MasterBlaster7

          Well. If the ERV’s credibility is not attacked and stands as an expert witness…that is a good thing….it would save a LOT of time.

  • ScienceFan

    I may get flak for this, but I think the trial is the best thing that could happen to the E-Cat, Rossi AND Industrial Heat. Let me explain.
    For Rossi (assuming everything we keep hearing is right):
    1) It is something that media outlets can latch onto, and the E-Cat gains much-needed publicity.
    2) He only has to prove that it works within the contractually required parameters (COP 6+), which in and of itself would prove that LENR is not only real, but works.
    3) He gets to absolutely humiliate IH as the patent trolls and tech-thieves they are.
    4) When Rossi comes out of court and everything he keeps saying is proven correct, he will be more than ready for mass-production and commercialization, and (hopefully) blow all the other potential (non-IH) competition out of the water who were waiting for the trial results before taking LENR seriously.

    For IH:
    1) They raise awareness of the other LENR techs that they do still have control of, which can potentially compete with the E-Cat.
    2) They already have marketing and production going of other LENR products, which may get to mass-production before the E-Cat can. (They have, after all, been gathering energy techs almost as long as Rossi has been working on the E-Cat’s. If the LENR effects are real, there would be other real ones they’ve bought up)
    3) They get to (try to) slow Rossi down as they get their own products to market.
    4) They have a slim chance of winning if they continue fighting Rossi in the trial, and then they would have control of the most promising LENR tech to come around so far.
    5) They can use the $89 mil owed to Rossi in #’s 1 – 4.

    • kenko1

      #3. Slow down what? You can’t slow down nothing. Quick….name an e-cat, hot-cat or quark-x installation.

    • Axil Axil

      It is COP = 4 not 6

  • Engineer48

    It would seem Jed claims he is talking with IH lawyers and they are offering him their opinions:

    http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg110812.html

    I wouldn’t know about that. Lawyers tell me the QuarkX is covered. Anyway,
    that is not relevant to the lawsuit, and it is not relevant to whether the
    one year test worked or not.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Good luck with the 2017 “deadline”. The attorney name of the game is billable hours, delay, delay, billable hours, delay, delay, billable hours.

  • Kevmo

    IH is no longer paying for a FUD campaign? When did they stop? When did they start? What evidence do you have for this double assertion?

  • Roland

    So far there appears to be at least one; and, in light of what Engineer48 has volunteered from his direct experience, Rossi obviously does not discuss, or even hint at, all that is transpiring at any given moment.

    At this juncture entities operating in the spheres effected by the advent of functional LENR, which is ubiquitous in it’s development at this point, are paying attention if for no other reason than to track what their competitors are looking into.

    The upcoming hearings into the security implications of functional LENR will serve to focus even more attention on this space regardless of the ongoing efforts to present LENR in an unflattering light by some parties whose oxen are about to be gored.

    • MasterBlaster7

      It seems you speak with some authority on the situation. What is your background and connection to LENR and Rossi Roland?

      Also, I hope what you are saying is true, that there are extrinsic forces pushing Rossi on to industrialization and commercial product. Bitter experience has taught me that this is the point that the delays and platitudes start. I sincerely hope that you are right and I am wrong.

      If you are right, I hope to here a lot more about industrialization and commercialization in the near future and less about the trial.

  • kenko1

    no. But I’ve seen three monkeys……..
    I’m beginning to think, after all these years, that IF it’s TGTBT, it probably isn’t true. Yawn….’rolls over’… snort….belch….gasp….yaWn……..

    • psi2u2

      Go back to sleep and leave the rest of us alone.

  • Roland

    What part of a complete record, documented in every detail, (including every scrap of data from all the instruments) a complete multi-camera video record, depositions from direct participants with professional certifications on the line and a binding report by a thoroughly competent independent party agreed to, and half paid for, by IH don’t you get?

    The suit has been filed, it is now moving forward and will now be tried before a jury whom will decide whether the concrete provisions of a commercial contract have been adhered to; nothing outside the purposefully limited scope of any and every contract can be argued, for or against, because, quite simply, the judge will not allow it by sustaining objections to every line of questioning, and attempt to enter into evidence, matters that threaten to introduce issues external and irrelevant to the concrete contractual language.

    That Leonardo is not seeking an outcome that requires the jury to direct that IH pay Leonardo $89 million (damages might be another matter entirely) vastly simplifies the presentation to the jury.

    Three re-engineered second generation 1megW steam plants, that are direct descendants from the plant at issue in the trial, are expected to be operational in the time frame before the trial begins; I think we can safely assume that a sincere effort will be made, by Leonardo, to accomplish this as planned, and then find a way to introduce that fact into evidence.

  • Job001

    It is exceptionally common for deep pocket old technology investors to “pay for delay” or military interests to create huge amounts of FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) when a new technology has military application. For this LENR test either could be the case, yet the vast FUD screen and potential for military use gives military the slight nod, IMO.

    Other blog explanations centered on IP and test results ignore the big money of FF and military interests as if not involved. IH also seemed to do a fast reversal from prior interests(Brown site remediation research) with no transparent explaination.

    Given past extreme obstruction of CF/LENR research since 1989 by big money invested in FF, military or energy research, It is exceptionally unlikely that big money interests are not involved behind the scenes now in this IP obstruction/fight.

    Follow the big money.

    • Roland

      Ta da.

      Sometimes circles of interest overlap for decades; I expect, over time, that this will be revealed as a significant strategic weakness here, especially as the tide turns.

      On another note, the ‘social scientists’ busy shaping opinion on the matter have overlooked the possibility that a group of smart, capable people might find common cause in a very robust response to the tactics that have always worked, ever so well, on the ‘less educated’.

      Funny how the whole judo thing works…

      • Mats002

        Hi Roland, are you saying that ‘Planet Rossi’, about 1000 people here and in other LENR Forums, are the ‘very robust response’ to the PTB:s FUD agenda?

        • psi2u2

          I would conjecture that posts to these forums have had a material consequence in the discussion and therefore, probably, the legal strategies of both sides.

          • Roland

            I would conjecture that the impact of the discussions on this forum are significantly wider than the effects on the legal maneuvers between Leonardo and IH et al and that a complete list of the readership, and their connections, would surprise many.

        • Roland

          Perhaps it’s just me but over the years I’ve been observing E-cat world there’s been a seismic shift in the tenor of the commentary and the quality of the initiatives undertaken by E-cat worlders.

          It’s a long reach from Mary Yugo to substantive discussions on LENR physics, the economic and geopolitical implications of advanced LENR designs and the launch of serious initiatives such as Engineer48’s Remote Areas & Disaster Response design.

          There has also been a significant shift in how the community responds to various APCO forays; the adults appear to be prevailing and the collective tolerance of deliberate obtuseness appears to be diminishing by the day.

          I can’t speak to the other LENR forums as I long ago arrived at the conclusion that this forum was, and is, the most interesting one. Cheers Frank.

          • bachcole

            I can’t speak to other LENR forums because I feel secure and loved and nurtured here and so I never venture elsewhere in LENR land.

  • Roland

    There is a significant contribution we can all make to the RSDR initiative; aside from the integration of the reactors into the physical systems, the plant itself represents the integration of off the shelf technologies into a unique but not particularly challenging architecture.

    In the broader context of shepherding villages successfully onto a higher plane of functionality, with a transformative technological ‘seed crystal’, a host of cultural, political, economic, educational, judicial and security issues require attention.

    My sense is, going forward, that this community has the potential to have a helpful role in shaping the social covenants that will allow a village-centric technology to flourish and genuinely uplift the poorest of the poor.

    We are presently approaching a historic moment; soon the most completely modern device on the planet will be the perfect centre for the most humble of villages.

    Might even make George happy in the process; he could personally buy one and donate it to needy third worlders.

    • psi2u2

      Very good summary.

  • Fedir Mykhaylov

    Why absurd? In court, the discussion regarding the specific tests and pay a specific amount at a performance of the device (1 MW plant).

  • Engineer48

    Jed and many others here have made representations the IH Customer, JM Chemical Products was a company owned by Rossi.

    It would seem those individuals never read the last page of the Rossi complaint, attached, where the last sentence makes the reality crystal clear that the owner is a UK registered company. This document’s accuracy was sworn to in the court.

    So anyone making claims the IH Customer is in anyway associated with Rossi is based on nothing.

    Please read the last sentence and know the sworn reality.

    • Mats002

      E48, I give you the LENR hero song for that info:


      • Engineer48

        Hi Mats002,

        When anti Rossi people say they are not interested in reading the contract nor complaint and then make statements that are clearly opposite to what was been sworn to in those documents, really says they think the people they are trying to deceive can’t read or are not aware of sworn statements.

        I call that willful distribution of knowingly false disinformation. Especially when that disinformation agent claims IH ERV data and lawyer advise access.

        • Chapman


          I tried taking your advice and giving Jed the benefit of the doubt. I considered the possibility that he may be honestly misinformed, and passing on bad information simply due to the lack of any first-hand experience concerning Rossi’s tech. I thought that the best way to bring him “back to the fold”, so to speak, was to help get him an opportunity to actually experiment with a prototype!

          To that end, I recently submitted to Dr. Rossi via JONP my insight and humbly suggested he should prototype a “JED” model QuarkX Reactor test unit in suppository form to be delivered without delay. I took note of the fact that, even on the rare occasion anymore when Jed appears sober, he still seems weak on technical know-how, and recommended accordingly that Dr. Rossi take special care to include a clear set of instructions on the proper “Insertion Protocol” (complete with color diagrams) and an addendum outlining suggestions as to how, and where, connection might be made between the “nested” device and a convenient 3-phase power source.

          To date I have recieved no reply, but I will keep you posted should my benevolent endeavours bare fruit.

          It would be wonderful if I could somehow contribute to Jed’s rehabilitation. After all, it is better to educate, than to deride.

          “Blessed be the Peacemakers…”

    • Ged

      Additionally, this update to the docket on June 30 also says the same: “Certificate of Interested Parties/Corporate Disclosure Statement – NONE
      disclosed by Leonardo Corporation, Andrea Rossi (Annesser, John)”. So that settles that matter.

  • Brokeeper

    HA! That is conundrum.

  • Brokeeper

    Thanks Chapman. Changed it above.

  • Zavod

    This could be a ploy to generate advertising and buzz around the process.

  • Ged

    According to the current docket information, set yesterday, it looks like the trial might have been moved up to 6/27/2017?

    “Jury Trial set for period of 6/26/2017 in Miami Division before Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga. Calendar Call set for 6/20/2017 09:00 AM in Miami Division before Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga. Motions to amend pleadings or join parties due by 8/11/2016. All discovery due by 2/27/2017.”

  • Roland

    Civilization in a box from a sub- Saharan village to the Oort Cloud.

  • Job001

    Not at all, ALL or nothing or SAME absolutist logic isn’t working well here. With humans and science statistics rule rather than error prone absolutist logic. Lawyers and politicians tend to use absolutist logic to promote their case. More often than not absolutist logic is used to promote the lie, the half lie, or the big lie. As a scientist I don’t recommend it.

  • Kevmo

    ahhh, a standard non-answer answer

  • Omega Z

    You do understand there is no correlation between education and intelligence. Right. We merely hope that the educated are actually good in their field of expertise. Even that is not a given.