Rossi v. Industrial Heat: Judge Makes Order on Required Information from IH for Discovery

In the ongoing Rossi v. Industrial Heat case, an order has been issued by John O’Sullivan, US Magistrate Judge, who is assigned to the the case.

Andrea Rossi’s team had recently submitted a list of items they wanted Industrial Heat et. al. to produce as information for the discovery process, which was very exhaustive; some have described it as a ‘fishing expedition’ and Industrial Heat had complained that the requests were burdensome and over-reaching.

Some of the key pieces of information required are:

“All communications, or documents memorializing communications, between the parties (e-mail, texts, etc.) by November 22, 2016.”

“Request No. 1 – Defendant agrees that it will provide documents evidencing the source of the $10 million payment. (Tr. 47: 9-12)”

“Request No. 2 – In addition to providing documents proving that Defendant had access to $89 million at or before the time the License Agreement was executed”

“Defendant shall answer the following interrogatories: “Did you or did you not have access to $89 million as of February l 5, 20162 If you had less than $89 million, then identify the amount of money you did have.” (Tr. 46:4-13)”

“Request No. 22 – the parties agreed to limit the search terms for electronic documents, including emails, to the following:
– E-cat
– E-cat IP
– Leonardo
– Rossi
– Guaranteed Performance (Tr. 38:3-9)”

The full order can be read here: http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/74-Order-on-informal-discovery-conference.pdf

All documents produced in the case so far can be accessed here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BzKtdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk

  • artefact

    Request nr. 22: What if E-cat was written e-cat or ecat or Ecat. Is that included?

  • artefact

    Request nr. 22: What if E-cat was written e-cat or ecat or Ecat. Is that included?

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      Normally, the attorneys will simply work this out. It is very clear what the legitimate request is about, and, yes, it would include those variants. IH actually responded to this request for production with:

      “… Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General and Specific Objections,
      Industrial Heat’s counsel is willing to meet and confer with Rossi’s counsel regarding
      appropriate search terms and topics for electronically stored information.”

      Rossi had requested a much broader search, which the Magistrate rejected. see document 70-3, paragraph 22.

      • Gerald

        You deliver incredible amounts of replydata on several forums, especially now on the Rossi case with details. Are you related to the Lomax defending Ih/darden?

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          No, not as to any connection I know of. Here is a photo of him: http://www.jonesday.com/clomax/

          Almost everything I write is from public record. The only forum I am writing extensively on at the present time is lenr-forum.com.

          • Ged

            You held the most replies in this thread here at the time, and spam other threads on this site extremely, so saying LENR forum is the only place you write extensively on is demonstratable false.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Great sample to base a sweeping conclusion on about “incredible amounts of reply data. “At the time ” = 2 comments. Total 13 comments in the thread now, before the present comment, 3 of mine, 3 of Ged’s. I do have a total of over 500 Disqus comments, most of them probably on this blog, but that’s over two years. I have 1741 posts on lenr-forum, and most are much longer, incorporating extensive research.

            As is too common, what I write was distorted. I did not say “the only place I write extensively on is lenr-forum.” I wrote about present writing, for the last few months. I’d say the main place I write, longer-term, is quora.com, where many of those who write here, if they wrote there like they write here, would get themselves banned quickly. I may spend a couple of minutes a day, average, writing here, and many hours a day on lenr-forum. Ged wants to argue with everything, apparently.

            Extreme spamming? Great. Spammers should be blocked. Lenr-forum com users freely point to this site. If Frank wants to prohibit reference to lenr-forum.com, he certainly could do it. Meanwhile, absent that, I will continue to add what I think could be helpful references or more extensive answers to questions than may be appropriate here, and so will others who do the same.

          • Michael W Wolf

            It is said that a good lawyer could represent either side. What arguments can you give in rossi’s favor. Or are you just an IH hack? If all you can give is pro IH interpretation, then you are not a good lawyer at all. Well, you spend a lot of time here, so….

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Then, obviously, I am not a lawyer. However, is a few minutes a day, at most, a “lot of time?”

            How does “not a lawyer” equal “IH hack”? Color me puzzled.

            I am not engaged in making up arguments, though I often mention possibilities. Maybe you should read what I actually write. I have not set out to write polemic, for any “side,” but was encouraged, by someone completely unconnected with IH, to write analysis. If you don’t like it, hey, don’t read it! The question you ask is interesting, though. Do I get to make things up, like a Wabbit that Rossi hasn’t yet pulled out of the hat? Or should I stay with known fact? I will consider this and reply on http://coldfusioncommunity.net, ASAP.

            Edit: The argument was written and is at http://coldfusioncommunity.net/argument-in-rossis-favor/

        • pg

          Of course this guy is at IH service, after the first few posts I stopped reading him altogether.

  • With respect to Barry West, Robert Godes and Brillouin Energy, Defendant
    will produce communications referencing E-cat, E-cat IP, Rossi, Leonardo
    and/or Guaranteed Performance (Tr. 71 :22- 72:4)

    Found this interesting too.

    • Ged

      Very interesting. Some other newish names popping up for communication reveals it seems. I didn’t expect the Judge to grant so much of this let alone basically all of it, particularly the communications, but Discovery rights are very powerful indeed…

  • With respect to Barry West, Robert Godes and Brillouin Energy, Defendant
    will produce communications referencing E-cat, E-cat IP, Rossi, Leonardo
    and/or Guaranteed Performance (Tr. 71 :22- 72:4)

    Found this interesting too.

  • sam
  • sam
    • interstellar hobo

      Why spam another forum on every reply here?

      • sam

        Just post the link if I think it will
        add information to this blog.

  • sam

    Just post the link if I think it will
    add information to this blog.

  • Ged

    O’Sullivan is a judge, don’t make pointless meaningless statements. And you are apparently wrong in all points. The order covers everything as far as I see. Look at the end of page 3 and the footnote for the blanket statement that addresses all not more specifically looked at. However, if something is left out it means the objection is overruled, not sustained, as Discovery requests succeed a priori: see https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_33 and http://federalpracticemanual.org/chapter6/section2

  • Ged

    You held the most replies in this thread here at the time, and spam other threads on this site extremely, so saying LENR forum is the only place you write extensively on is demonstratable false.