Ross v. IH Trial begins on June 28th (Update #2: New Set of Jurors Selected)

We have had plenty of discussion here over the last year and a half or so in connection with the Rossi v. Industrial Heat et. al lawsuit, and there have been hundreds of documents posted in connection with the case. Now the moment that Andrea Rossi has been waiting for — his moment in court — has arrived.

For most people in the world this is a nonevent. I think very few people are aware that there is a multimillion dollar lawsuit about cold fusion/LENR taking place. It’s no surprise that the news media are not paying attention to the case, since LENR is either dismissed or ignored by the majority of reporters and pundits.

Luckily, for those of us interested in the events, there is someone who is attending the trial in Miami, Florida and reporting about it online. That is Abd Lomax, who has posted on this site many times, and who has a website called Cold Fusion Community. It seems that his site will be an important resource for those of us who are interested in the proceedings of the case. The link to his website is:

According to Abd, today was mainly taken up with the seating of the jury, and the lawywers making opening statements. He says that Rossi’s lawyer, Brian Chaiken, used material from a recent post on the Sifferkoll website.

I’m glad there is at least one person who has taken the time and trouble to attend the trial, and who is willing to report about it to the rest of us.

UPDATE: Here’s an excerpt from an article on the Law 360 website:

Judge Orders Restart In Trial Over $89M IP Licensing Dispute
By Carolina Bolado

Law360, Miami (June 29, 2017, 2:14 PM EDT) — A trial over an $89 million licensing agreement concerning an energy catalyzer patent is off to a rocky start after a Florida federal judge declared a mistrial Thursday just one day after seating a jury, forcing attorneys to start again the next morning.

The court had seated a jury Wednesday afternoon for the trial, which pits Florida-based Leonardo Corp. against its cold fusion nuclear reactor licensees, Cherokee Investment Partners LLC and related entity Industrial Heat LLC, for allegedly failing to abide by payment schedule agreements….

UPDATE #2 (July 1, 2017)

Abd Lomax posted in a comment below that yesterday (Friday, Jun 30th) “a 13-member jury was selected (yes, they can do that, it means they could lose up to 7 members and still complete the trial.”

  • Dr. Mike

    It’s really great that Abd Lomax will be sitting in on the trail. Looking forward to reading his updates.

  • Engineer48

    Suspect it may be a challenge for Abd to NOT add in his opinion and to be an impartial reporter.

    • Toussaint françois

      I have the same feeling !

      • Engineer48

        Hi Toussaint,

        I do appreciate Abd’s efforts and also appreciate his chosen task is not an easy one as both sides may become aggressive/upset and attack him for any apparent bias.

        We ALL should back off and let him report as he is our only eyes and ears at the trial.

        • Steve D

          Right E48. Only an opinion can convey the atmosphere of the courtroom. We would be watching this live if we could just to experience that ourselves. And analysis too? I say go for it Abd! I’m sure I’d lose my way trying to understand the proceedings, and besides, there are certain to be plenty of views here too on ECW. It won’t change the outcome.

          • Stephen

            I’m also glad Abd is there and really respect and am grateful for him giving up his free time to be there.

            I think what ever our individual points of view for many of us have followed the ECat story every day since we became aware of it and for many that is also daily for many years! That in itself is incredible. And I am very glad someone has been able to attend this land mark event in its story.

            We all have our points of view. I don’t think I could write a blog with out being influenced by my own and I wouldn’t Impose that restriction on any one else. And I agree with Steve above it takes an opinion to convey the atmosphere which is an important part of the story.

            There are two kinds of critics I think dishonest ones who for what ever reason want to convince people to a contrary opinion what ever the cost to truth. Those people tend to repeat the same thing over and over again with little thought or development and knowingly use incorrect data or interpretation to support their point of view. And honest ones who are cautious about the data they have read and want to convey that caution and temper what they see as over optimistic opinions of others. I think the first group would reluctantly be proved wrong where as the second group would be shocked but happy about it. Ironically from ARs posts I think even he recognizes and respects the opinions of honest critics. I think Abd is strong in his views but firmly in the second group of honest critics so I respect that (even if my view on the data I have seen is more optimist).

            So thanks to Abd and I look forward to his reports.

            Incidentally Abd mentioned in his latest update that there was declared a mistrial due to jurors having to withdraw I think. So a new jury needs to be selected today? Is this right? I wonder if a lawyer type here could explain that process.

          • Steve D

            Thanks Stephen, Abd writes well. He seems to have a good comprehension of the legal process. Without the emotive factor the word “interject” simply becomes “said” in robotic language. Who would have ever thought that science buffs have had to become budding lawyers to get a grasp on LENR?

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Yes, it all started over Friday. This time they started with a panel of 60. Three, by the way, had heard of cold fusion and correctly explained what it was. There was a professor of biology who said she had studied thermodynamics. There were many interesting people. Unfortunately, perhaps, most were excused. Vacations, some health issues, etc. they ended up with 13 jurors, giving much room in cases more need to leave. One juror was wearing hijab.

            The standard jury summons says two weeks. What happened with the first panel was that, obviously, it dawned on them what was really involved, after being chosen.

            Then, jury sitting, all parties gave opening statements. There was one set of new facts, I had not seen before, in Rossi’s opening, some evidence that Cherokee considered itself involved early on. It’s likely moot. Entire Agreement clauses are quite strong, and Rossi had a year in which to change his mind.

            Pace, for IH, presented nothing new, but his manner was new. There was far more emphasis on “fake” than before.

            The 3rd party defendant lawyers both reminded the jury that what they had just heard isn’t evidence, which is true but slightly misleading. That is, yes, the arguments are not evidence, the conclusions presented are not evidence, but evidence was presented that will certainly be admitted (there are monitors in front of each juror and big ones that the gallery can see, and so the jury saw some of the emails and documents that were presented in Motions for Summary Judgment.

            What the attorneys are doing in the opening statements is mentioning certain crucial facts or ideas, so that when the jury hears them later, they are more likely to be retained.

          • Stephen

            Thanks Abd. That’s good and interesting information and a very good window on how things are going there. I’m glad you are there.

        • clovis ray

          surly, we have someone besides Adb in the Miami area. we’ve waited all these years for this trial, and now we need someone there everyday reporting about things only the peanut gallery knows what is. someone that peaks the jargon.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            I’d love to have company!

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          Thanks. I’m hoping to get access to the daily transcripts. If I can, I’ll be able to a better job. I will then, live, be focusing on the non-verbal information. This is, in fact, much of what a jury considers.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          If anyone objects to my reporting, CFC is open for commentary. Fact is fact, but I may still err in reporting it. I then may also err in interpreting it. I depend on the community to help me clean things up. As to the parties, I’m there every day of the trial, I hope, and they can talk with me privately or in public, with or without a specific promise of confidentially. I.e. They may speak to me “off the record.” I already have heard some things that I will not reveal without permission, even though there was no promise. I am not Steve Krivit, in case anyone was confused about that!

          One brief report: neither Rossi nor Darden appear to have fangs. They are both cordial and friendly, though I’ve seen no direct interactions between them. And Rossi’s wig looks fine.

    • Chapman

      Yes, I too suspect he is challenged…

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      I have no commitment to not add opinion. However, if I present opinion as fact, call me on it! I do know the difference.

      I am not a juror nor the judge. I get to watch and appreciate.

      My trust is in reality, not my opinions.

  • sam
    • In case anyone missed it there was a mistrial because too many jurors begged off of such a long trial. They are starting over again today.

      Why the duration is not part of the initial screening, I can’t explain. Seems moronic.

      • Ged

        That is odd. It is also usually not allowed, but I can’t speak for Florida’s system. In other States I have seen, you have to make your case for getting out of jury duty before the day of selection, otherwise you are in it for good and cannot legally get out unless for very specific extreme emergencies.

        But, this is Florida after all.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          The summons says up to two weeks. So these jurors may have been prepared for that. A few (very few) had immediate problems. A few were excused before voir dire. Neither the judge nor the parties want jurors operating under stress. There were a few examples where the judge herself rejected an excuse, but all these were then open to objections from the parties. Parties had so many arbitrary rejections to use, and both Rossi and IH used all those (on the second day). There was a little, but very little, argument over “for cause.” So there are now 13 essentially agreed-upon jurors ready to hear evidence. The federal standard is 6-12. The judge said the parties can decide later if there is an extra at the end. So two days were lost, total, the second day being a quick decision on mistrial. The plus side: I got to hear the two major opening statements twice. They changed substantially!

  • georgehants

    If there where any sense or justice, the judge would throw the whole thing out the door and charge them all with crimes against humanity for fighting over money when lives are involved.
    50 years each in the American Guantanamo Bay gulag would be about right, assuming Rossi is genuine.

    • Chapman

      Should the same sentence be imposed upon the the staff of MIT and Cal Poly, the Bush Administration energy dept officials, the publishers and contributors of all the peer review journals, and all the others who trashed P&F in the first place? I mean, assuming Rossi is genuine…

      We are gonna need a bigger gulag!

      • georgehants

        Chapman, you choose who stops a caring and sharing World from being if you want and maybe you have some great ideas how it can be brought about.

        • Chapman

          You DO realize that I am agreeing with you, right?

          I say we should re-instate the inquisition! And WHOEVER is responsible for denying the world the benefits of CF should rightly be publicly prosecuted and burned at the stake.

          That IS what you want, right? I mean, that is what you keep posting. So I am agreeing with you. Scientific corruption is a serious crime, and should be a capital offense if it leads to a crime against humanity, right?

          Or maybe, just MAYBE mind you, if you think about it….. perhaps the whole “death to the baby killers and antisocial truth deniers” is just a little over the top… You think?

          • georgehants

            Chapman, so glad you agree with working for a sharing and caring World.
            I think we both know when we are purposely going over the top to make a point.
            Guilt on every subject is usually determined only by those who wish power and gain for themselves in this corrupt society we live in.
            To find a direction without the inquisition, rich, powerful etc. leading us to more suffering for many, I can only use the term, “caring and sharing” that means a fully democratic positive result.
            Just like any discrimination you can name only enough people caring about the suffering will ever change things, I think.

          • Chapman

            Love you George!

            We both dream of a world free of knuckleheads and miscreants!!!

          • georgehants

            Love you to Chapman, let’s keep dreaming.
            Thanks Frank for allowing my usual diversion also your hard work updating the site.
            Keyboard now works fine, refresh fast as usual, always open thread seems to have lost some of the latest comments.

          • Chapman

            Heck George, there is not enough news coming from the trial to keep us occupied, so conversation drifts to other things. Perfectly natural.

            And since Frank will not let me share any limericks, we might as well just find something else to talk about. We all hang out HERE cause we like the company, and the conversation…

            AND, your opinions are just as valid as anyone else’s… 🙂

          • georgehants

            Morning Chapman, my only reason from the very beginning, as Frank will assure you, is only the benefit Cold Fusion could bring to the poor and help to equalize this sad World.
            For which I thank Frank for his kind support of a subject that could not be more relevant to Cold Fusion
            Therefore this is not a quiet time (results excepted) but a busy time, showing the insanity of a system that allows seven years of delay, ridiculous court cases, all for obscene profits for the few, while millions suffer.
            In that time I have endured much abuse which just proves my point of how sad much of this life is.
            Love your views (mostly) and limericks, afraid my limericks are very restricted and I am sure Frank doesn’t want mine about Bishops and young ladies, ha.
            A little Joy

          • Gerard McEk

            I agree with both of you.
            Suggestion: I believe it should be possible to develop AI inqusitor. A machine that can balance all the arguments and is also able to check those. What would it be wonderful to have an independent non corrupt machine that can help to judge for what is good for humanity and what is not within a few seconds!

          • Chapman

            Right on… AI Judge, 30 second trial, them OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!

          • Tad G

            If you haven’t read Daemon and Freedom by Daniel Suarez you should give them a look. You’d probably enjoy them. 🙂

          • Chapman

            Thanks! I will check it out.

            I am always looking for good book references… 🙂

          • georgehants

            Gerard, Wonderful idea, ha, I think we already have them though.
            Every person has that capability and immediately knows within reason “good from bad” especially young children, but usually choose a path created by this sad society of personal gain over caring and sharing.
            As Chapman says below, just a silly dream at the moment.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          The best way is to make sure people don’t adopt your ideas and thus resulting in everyone starving to death. So the best solution here is to ensure that people don’t adopt your socialist ideas – if we can prevent people from adopting your socialist ideas, then we can bring about a world of caring and sharing. If you don’t respect what people own and have and what they worked for? Well then you have slavery. Are you suggesting we go back to the idea of having slaves like we used to? (the fact that you don’t think you suggesting slavery is moot, since that is the result of your way of thinking).

          So you not talking about caring and sharing. Your idea of sharing is pointing a gun at people and taking away their money. Exactly how is taking peoples labor away by gunpoint and force an act of charity? Remember, your socialist system ONLY works when you take money away from people by force of the state and that means by gunpoint.

          If you actually believe that there some “magic” box at the end of the tax year in which you “volunteer” the amount you give to that socialist government, then I have a Brooklyn bridge to sell you. So this money is taken by force and by gunpoint.

          All you socialists of the world are free to give Rossi money. But how come none of you are? (It called hypocrisy if you are wondering). So if you have all that caring and sharing, then why not you gazillion socialists start giving money to Rossi? (Oh right, socialists = feel good by using other people’s money!!).

          So your caring and sharing is not with your own money, but everyone’s else?

          Rossi fighting for his property rights and without money he cannot bring the e-cat to the world. I mean how can Rossi build and sell the e-cat without money? You socialists had 120 billion pledged at the last Paris climate summit. And clearly something like LENR is a winner for clean air. So you socialists TOOK ALL THAT MONEY and did so by gunpoint (the money is tax dollars of which I noted is not a free choice – but collected by the state at force of gunpoint).

          So the guilty party here is the one that HAS THE BUCKETS of money and resources here. Rossi does not have money – but your socialist’s governments do. So they are the greedy ones, they are the ones not caring, and they are the ones with all the money that could fund Rossi and LENR.

          How can Rossi be guilty when he has no money and your socialist government has billions of dollars?

          And we not talking about money for roads etc, we talking about carbon taxes and money pledged at the Paris summit – this was SPECIFIC to fight global warming.

          So we have to look at the facts – and the fact is Rossi has no money to continue, but your socialists governments not only have billions, but have taken billions SPECIFIC to fight climate change. So there are billions and billions that have been taken under a save the planet message, and yet those governments are not doing anything with these funds taken under climate change. It means you socialist folks are lying and taking money away from people under false pretenses.

          If you socialist folks are going to behave this way, then why trust anything you say here?

          Is it not dishonest to take all that Paris summit money and not spend it on clean technologies like Rossi and LENR?

          So the guilty party is the one that took all that money in the name of clean air, and yet they not spending the money on clean technologies. Seems to me the guilty party here is you socialists that taken all this environment money and yet are doing nothing.

          If Rossi had taken 120 billion dollars and THEN produced nothing, then I might side with you. However, right now it you socialists that taken the 120+ billion dollars for the environment and then done nothing for LENR or Rossi – so clearly socialist folks like you are the guilty parity here.

          It not speculation that these billions been taken from people for fixing climate change. Rossi not taken billions from the people. So the only guilty party here can be those that have billions and taking billions from people for the environment and done nothing with that money.

          So are you saying that taking money by force and by gunpoint is an act of caring and sharing? Is not this the exact same augment used by slave owners?

          And if you believe your idea and system is so great, then were are all you people funding LENR or funding Rossi then?

          Cleary people like you with your socialist’s
          ideas of caring and sharing are the evil ones. The problem is not caring and sharing – it how you achieve the caring and sharing that is the evil you folks hide.

          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants
          • Omega Z

            A women with 2 children in poverty-

            We provide them with housing and utilities. Free health care @ $30K from the tax payers. $6000 a year in food stamps. Free schooling for their children. Various modes of transportation access.

            All that’s asked is that they provide 20 hours a week of community service.(picking up refuse, weeding public areas etc…) The rest of their time is theirs to get schooling or training so that you can find a real job.

            But, but, Those are necessities says she. I shouldn’t be required to work for them. This is No exaggeration. I’ve had people tell me this with a straight face.

            In biblical times, it was requested that farmers leave 10% of their crop unharvested. Thus the poor could go out and harvest it to feed themselves. Basically, the poor were required to try and help themselves in return for food.

            Todays mentality, the poor think that the harvest should all be done for them. Preferably cooked and prepared served up to them at a fast food restaurant. Because being required to cook their own food and doing the dishes is like being required to work for it. Food is a necessity. They shouldn’t have to work for it. Thus making those who do work and provide all these necessities their slaves…

            I believe-Society has an obligation to TRY and provide opportunities for others to provide for themselves. Society has a responsibility to help those who worked all their lives contributing to society directly or indirectly until reaching retirement age. As well as those born or becoming disabled and incapable of productive work. Note the majority of the claimed disabled can and should work.

            I know a guy who collects $1200 a month and many other Government provided benefits because he has a bad knee. I doesn’t prevent him from tromping through the woods to go hunting, fishing, playing football or going swimming etc. It only hurts when he’s required to work. It’s an amazingly discretionary infliction. Is it not?

            You should realize that most of those in poverty get government help. Many of them are among the working poor who’s jobs can never pay enough(people wont pay more for some services) to be a living wage. I don’t mind helping them as they are at least trying to help themselves.

          • georgehants

            Your argument seems to be with those producing the Facts showing undeserved poverty while others live in extreme luxury.
            You seem to be suggesting a child from the American slums has the same equal chance to succeed and thrive in life as the child of a rich person, (exceptions excepted)
            I would suggest you get on the bus and visit somewhere like Ghana where you can see people dying before your eye’s, not because they are lazy but because there is no sharing and caring in this World, beyond the few.
            Your continued arguments (analogy) that Blacks have always been equal in society and it was their own fault if they where discriminated against gets a little tiresome

      • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

        Cal Tech, and no. Scientists and others are allowed to make mistakes. If they fake data, that can be a career destroyer, but mere interpretive error is no crime. I know that some claim MIT faked data, but more likely is that someone “cleaned up” a plot; because if they did actually see LENR, it would be a major outlier, since they clearly did not set up the necessary conditions.

    • NEXT WEEK you georgehants will be complaining about something else you did not invent, don’t own the rights to BUT will lecture everyone else about HOW it should be the community property “of the people” … kinda like Karl Marx did …

      • georgehants

        Jim, it would be much more Honest if instead of complaining naively about me, you just say that you do not care about people suffering needlessly.
        The Guardian
        Dirty water kills 5,000 children a day

        • Chapman

          George, it would be much more Honest if instead of complaining naively about abstract concepts of violence against children, we all focused our attention on REAL and DOCUMENTED atrocities committed each day under the banner of “progress”.
          U.S. Centers for Disease Control
          Mothers kill 3,700 babies every day

          • georgehants

            Chapman, I think there is so much to be improved that what is needed is a general desire to remove all corruption, suffering, violence, war for money (arms sales) etc. etc.
            It can only start when all media is removed from the control of politicians, capitalists, etc. and made completely independent and free to inform the Truth and ruthlessly work for fairness and justice in every area.
            I think it fair to say many people are tired of our corrupt society run by the few for the benefit of the few.
            In our case Rossi feeling justified in delaying a possible life saving and improving technology (if genuine) just for absurd riches instead of a fair reward and sharing and caring.

          • Chapman

            A very interesting proposition.

            This “Media”, being free from all political and corporate control and seeking only truth and justice… who then should they be accountable to at times when THEY are revealed as the source of the corruption in the system?

            With great power comes great responsibility, Right? And with great AUTHORITY comes the demand for a greater ACCOUNTABILITY. In our system, a crime committed under the flag of authority carries a much greater punishment, because that crime is not just limited to the immediate victim of the transgression, but also represents the violation of the TRUST of the entire society that bestowed that authority upon the offending party.

            By that same logic, is not a lie told by the media (who enjoys a high degree of legal protection against Libel and Slander laws that render them immune to legal actions that would expose individuals guilty of the same level of falsification to criminal and monetary liabilities) a much GREATER CRIME, and worthy of the most extreme punishment that a society can impose?

            If the “media” is to be absolutely FREE to pursue “the truth”, must they not also be held supremely guilty when they wilfully lie? Yes?

            But, when there ARE no ETHICS being taught in journalism anymore, and it is all reduced to “If it Bleeds, it LEADS”, then what power is there to restrain their actions and hold them accountable for their crimes?

            How are we, AS a society, to trust a media that so blatantly LIES with every headline, and totally falsifies entire narratives???

            The days of Walter Cronkite are gone., and we are sadly left with no one better than the likes of Joe and Mika, Lemon, Blitzer, Acosta, Bash, Cooper, Mathews, and that weird Maddow guy…

          • Omega Z


            Isn’t it interesting that a Blogger is much more liable for what he published then a MSM. Even should he publish the same story. A blogger can even be forced to disclose unnamed sources under threat of law, but MSM is not.

          • Chapman

            Yes, incredibly interesting!

            In our modern inverted perspective, we hold publishers of opinions LESS accountable based upon the increase in the number of individuals they influence!

            A man, as a private citizen, speaks out about his neighbor and the full wrath of the legal system can be brought to bear upon him.

            A blogger speaks out on the web, and reaches FAR more persons with his opinion, and he enjoys a margin of protection under freedom of speech, yet can still be summoned and compelled and subpoenaed, and held liable for damage IF his words are found to be grossly and intentionally inciting or defamatory.

            A member of the “media” can go online, or on air, and make the most ridiculous accusations and promote the most offensive lies, and intentionally slander good people across the globe with ZERO fear of legal retribution, AND THEN turn around and whine like a little biotch when the victim of their abuse dares to strike back in the same public forum. The media is TRULY SHOCKED and UTTERLY IN FEAR FOR THEIR LIVES because someone dares to return their volley, or god forbid “spikes the net” and returns their wild serve with surgical speed and accuracy!

            So, in this day and age, what exactly CONSTITUTES “The Media”? What should qualify as “The Press”? Should a Blogger not be afforded the same respect, and protections, as the New York Times? Should a private citizen not have the same? In all cases, we have persons simply stating their opinions. Nothing more. There is no pursuit of truth any more, so why keep up the fake pretense that there is any altruism remaining anywhere?

            And why should a paper news outlet reporter have special protections that a twitterer does not? Why should the source of their fake news be shielded? Why should anonymous sources be protected? If you, I, The Washington Post, CNN, or The Huffington Post disseminate a libelous falsehood we should each be held equally accountable, and the SOURCE of that false information should be subject to forced public disclosure and legal repercussion.

            The days of allowing this “Orwellian Elitism” that declares “All opinions are equal, but some are MORE equal than others” is past. The Press MUST be held to the same legal responsibility as any individual citizen.

            Everyone has a right to freedom of speech,
            freedom of opinion,
            and freedom to be an ass…
            but there must be a price demanded when that freedom is abused, and everyone must man-up and be held equally accountable for their actions, without seeking special exemption.

          • Chapman

            Allow me a correction…

            There is ONE person out there who repeatedly impresses me with his blatant and deliberate attempt to maintain a sense of neutrality and ethics in reporting…

            Mats Lewan.

            One has to read his stuff carefully to appreciate the care he takes to view things objectively, and report honestly. I am not leg-humping, cause he ain’t even around, but HE is what old-time journalists USED to aspire to be!

            His approach to reporting is no longer in vogue though, and he would not be well respected in the halls of CNN, MSNBC, or The New York Times. Too bad for us all…

          • Omega Z

            Three cheers for Mats. I have a lot of respect for him even on the very rare occasions when I may disagree with him.

          • cashmemorz

            Therefore is is up to us individually to glean the best needles from the haystacks of mush information out there. We are reduced to each of us becoming our own investigative reporter, reporting to ones self. And if any one is willing to listen, depends on a reputation built up individually. Sad to say, as soon as that reputation carries some weight, corruption tends to set in, because it is all, in the end, about how much power an individual can wield. Sorry, GeorgeHant, that is what it is, how it is and why it is the way it is.

            Edit: There are efforts to mitigate this, by paying judges large stipend to do their work. But even that is sometimes not enough where politics sticks its nose into the judicial system to get its way. So sometiomesthe system works or seems to work. Often it just grinds on until something really important has to be considered. Such as LENR. Then all hell can break out. That is what I expect during this trial between Rossi and IH. I am convince there are others in the wings influencing IH to win or delay Rossi. This would easily explain the attitude of IH when they have a working IP but act as if it, does not work

        • Omega Z

          “Dirty water kills 5,000 children a day”

          Which is a great improvement from what is was in the past.

          As to E-cat. You are under the false impression that it will have a big impact on the issue. It wont. It would be like giving tires to someone who doesn’t own a car. What is needed is water treatment plants and all that entails. Like a plumbed water distribution/recuperation system and waste treatment plants.

          Probably you think E-cats can be used for water desalination by distillation. What you don’t realize is that process is going to be banned by the UN within 5/10 years. Even water filtration like reverse osmosis is going to need a major rethink and re-engineered.

          The current process kills 10’s of millions of tons of sea life every year and they are just not going to allow the destruction of 90% of sea life to provide water for 5000 kids a day. It is not sustainable and will cause far more deaths then it will saves long term.

          You want to provide water to those children, Build water & waste treatment plants. As long as that water is not used for swimming pools and irrigation systems, 90% of the water processed can be fully recycled. Thus very little out sourced water will be needed.

          • georgehants

            Omega Z, interesting view, so we all go back to sleep, drive our SUV’s about as if there is no problem.
            Sleep well.

  • Frank Acland

    Judge Orders Restart In Trial Over $89M IP Licensing Dispute
    By Carolina Bolado

    Law360, Miami (June 29, 2017, 2:14 PM EDT) — A trial over an $89 million licensing agreement concerning an energy catalyzer patent is off to a rocky start after a Florida federal judge declared a mistrial Thursday just one day after seating a jury, forcing attorneys to start again the next morning.

    The court had seated a jury Wednesday afternoon for the trial, which pits Florida-based Leonardo Corp. against its cold fusion nuclear reactor licensees, Cherokee Investment Partners LLC and related entity Industrial Heat LLC, for allegedly failing to abide by payment schedule agreements….

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      There are not many spectators in the gallery, and I saw this woman, so I asked her what she was there for. Hopefully nicely… Reporter, she said. For? Law360. I wrote about their prior articles. She gave me her card and we will be in communication.

      I will mention to her that CIP is not a licensee…

  • LION

    Does anyone know if the trial is being live streamed and if so a link to purchase access. THANKS.

  • hhiram

    At this point I’m broadly in agreement with And Lomax’s analysis. IH bought access to Rossi’s tech for ~$10 million to find out whether or not it worked. If it worked, then the additional $89 million is peanuts compared to what they would make commercializing cold fusion. If it didn’t work, they know they do t have to worry about Rossi as a competitor and can focus on commercializing using Brillouin’s tech.

    They win either way. And of course it looks pretty obvious now that Rossi’s original ECat plant doesn’t work.

    So unless Rossi can demo a working quark X in the courtroom as the proverbial rabbit pulled out of the hat, nothing will convince the just that he isn’t a fraud. He may even go to prison.

    Either way, we the public win. I am personally fed up with Rossi. If he had a working device, he should have shown the whole world and started saving lives instead of chasing more millions. At this point, I just hope he gets out of the way so LENR can be realized by humanity. If he gets burned in the process of being swept aside, I couldn’t care less any more.

    • Ciaranjay

      This is a civil dispute about a contract.
      Rossi won’t be allowed to demonstrate a working Quark X and he won’t go to prison.
      The result, whatever it is, will convince nobody of the reality, or otherwise, of Rossi’s tech.
      Rossi had a chance to demonstrate a working QuarkX over the last 12 months and decided not to.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Ciaranjay,

        Part of the contract dispute is about does the ECat actually work or not. IH claims it does not work and Rossi claims it does and so IH own him the money.

        If, lets say, Rossi presented new data from say a group of Swedish professors, who had very recently retested the Dog Bone reactors built by IH, originally sent to the Lugano test team and found they do in fact work, well then IH’s claim that none of the reactors they built using the IP Rossi gave them worked, will be shown to be false.

        Which might suggest IH could then have a really difficult job convincing the jury that IH had reason to break the contract and not pay Rossi.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          Whether the technology works or not is not central to the case. If Rossi demonstrates, Quark-X, even irrefutably, it might strengthen a possibility, but IH claimed multiple possibilities, only one of them was that there is no technology. (Which is very difficult to prove, other than circumstantially.) Another is a stronger position, that regardless of whether or not the technology works, Rossi did not effectively teach them how to make devices that will reliably pass fully-independent testing. This was crucial to the Agreement, though not explicitly stated. To raise the $89 million without defrauding investors or customers, they would absolutely need that.

          I will be, on the blog, going over the Statements of the Case.

          Given the history of affairs like this, even if Rossi loses this case and even if criminal charges are filed and Rossi goes to jail ( which I do not wish for him, but I see it as not impossible from fact known to me), there will be people who believe the technology is real.

          Should he win, on the other hand, he is very unlikely to collect anything, because his attempts to pierce the corporate veil are contrary to law (unless there is much stronger evidence of fraud than we have seen, and I see no way at all for Cherokee to be found liable even if there was fraudulent representation by Darden and Vaughn, and all that appears estopped to me.) to move ahead, he will need hew investors, and few indeed would be willing to risk having happen to them what happened to IH.

          • Omega Z

            Win or Lose- Rossi wins.

            Rossi’s detractors assume the technology doesn’t work!!!
            Rossi filing lawsuit against Daden inc only makes sense if the tech works.

            Rossi wins, Contract ruled void when Darden/IH can’t make payment. Rossi regains his IP.
            Rossi loses. Contract ruled void. Rossi required to repay the $11.5M. Rossi regains his IP.

            Rossi wants to regain full control of his IP.
            Does anyone think 55% of the world market is worth a mere $100M.

            If the Quark works as says, Rossi will devide that world into 7 markets. For parcel #1, Lets start the bidding at $2 Billion and 5% of gross $ales.

          • Steve Savage

            “If the Quark works as says, Rossi will devide that world into 7 markets. For parcel #1, Lets start the bidding at $2 Billion and 5% of gross $ales.”

            And if I had the $$$ I would gladly pony up, cause that would be peanuts compared to the potential revenue / profit.

          • Omega Z

            Just keep in mind. Rossi is merely selling you the right to manufacture a device that makes cheap heat. Nothing else. Anything else you intend to do with it will be an additional cost. You may spend years of R&D to integrate this technology for use with a limited time window before everyone can use the technology.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Abd,

            Whether the ECat works or not is VERY central to the case.

            I’m amazed you seem to be backing away from that fact. Do you now have concerns that just maybe the ECat plant did in fact work as claimed?

            We do now know that Jed’s half filled flow meter pipe was a complete red herring and that the flow meter was at the bottom of the condensate return system.

            We also know that none of the IH experts ever reported on the large exhaust fan directly above the JMP factory area. Jed, Murray and Smith all seemed to have vision problems and seemingly never saw the fan. That fan puts the heat too hot in the warehouse statements by Jed, Murray and Smith into the same basket as the 1/2 filled flow meter pipe.

            Then there is the very visible hole in the dry wall that is just the right size and position for the steam bypass pipe to deliver steam to the upper story heat exchanger. Yet Smith claims there was no such hole, despite it being clearly visible. Again it seems IH experts have vision issues that stop them seeing what they do not want to see.

            Abd, if you had spent the same time on this forum as the other, you would have learned the real world engineers here decided a long time ago that the engineering evidence very strongly suggests the 1MW plant did work as claimed, plus just about every claim made by Jed, Murray and Smith has been examined and found to be baseless.

            Should be an interesting trial, especially if the IH lawyers repeat the various claims of Jed, Murray and Smith, that have been shown to be false.

          • Well since there has been already a “pre-trial” on the forums of the internet lawyers from both side has a bit better understanding of what can and cannot be used in their advantage.

          • Omega Z

            “Rossi did not effectively teach them how to make devices that will reliably pass fully-independent testing.”

            I have taught people certain tasks and intricacies to obtain certain results. ONLY to have them screw everything up the minute you are no longer watching over their shoulder. One thing I have learned about these people is they will never get the task done right if you aren’t present every minute. They have a superiority complex, A I know better then you what is actually necessary to do the job.

            If this is an employee or potential employee, the best you can do is send them packing. They will do nothing but cause you a lot of grief.

        • Omega Z

          I personally believe the technology works. That said, I think Rossi has control issues. Enter the Quark. Daden told Woodford funds that the E-cat worked. He claimed they verified it themselves with their own people. Thus Woodford invested in it.

          I think Darden’s concerns are the way the contract was worded. Ultimately, they wont end up with all the license rights as hoped. Who can compete should Rossi offer it to the Chinese. They could easily make Rossi richer overnight then the 10 richest people in the world combined. And Darden has no recourse. This is a last ditch effort on their part to prevent that.

        • Ciaranjay

          Hi E48
          It will certainly be interesting if your supposition/prediction happens.
          Even so it is not assured whether it would be admissible, we shall see.
          In any case my prediction remains that no QuarkX will be on show and the trial will not end with Rossi going to jail.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Ciaranjay,

            This is not a criminal trial. No one will go to jail.

            It is a civil contract trial where one party will probably be required to pay the other party some amount of money.

            For sure the lawyers on both sides will get their money before either IH or Rossi gets theirs.

    • Omega Z

      Then Woodford funds should take Darden Inc to court and have Darden jailed for fraud. Darden claimed and recieved investment funds claiming the E-cat worked. They verified it themselves with their own people. So said Darden…

      There is more here then we are aware of. I think short sightedness on Dardens part in the contract is a big issue. They did not buy the technology. They bought the license to manufacture and sell the E-cat in 55% of the world market.

      The follow on in the contact is Darden’s big problem. It doesn’t stop Rossi from starting his own manufacturing company for the other 45%. Should Rossi decide to license out the technology for the other 45%, Darden has to match any offer plus 10%. Darden was unsettled by a Chinese offer to buy into IH. Should Rossi offer them the 45%, No Way Darden could compete on price. Rossi could also offer to sell them 100% of the IP ownership outright.

      Either way. Do you think China would “HONOR” any previous license agreement. The best Darden could hope for is the U.S. Government forcing recognition of his license in the U.S.. All other nations are up for grabs.

      Rossi going to jail. NOPE. No way. Don’t know where you’re from, but this is the U.S.. This lawsuit is about breach of contract. Nothing else. The Quark will not be making an appearance in court.

  • Bear1145

    Abd is a far better reporter than CNN or MSNBC. He is not just making it up as he goes. There is a trial right, real evidence, real jurors and a real e-cat. The issue is the contract and the performance of the e-cat. Abd must stay alert and insure IH(Darden) doesn’t meet the judges husband on some boat while both are in the same marina to discuss grand kids…

    • Ged

      Abd has direct ties to and strongly supports IH, so don’t count on that. He has always been extraordinarily biased in IH’s favor, but as long as his reporting remains factual, then it is all good–and we are grateful for the time he takes to report.

      • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

        I have no ties to IH, other than a shared interest in LENR. My focus is on the science, not commercialization. My trip has been entirely funded by relatively small donors; while I cannot be certain that an anonymous donor is unconnected with IH, the real issue would be undue influence. I do not publish any alleged fact from any party without verifying it. I have been talking with some of the parties at the trial. Rossi has been cordial. (And he appeared to know who I am.) Nobody has been hostile.

        The blog is partially neutral information, and partially judgment and opinion, hopefully informed. The distinction is crucial. I thank Frank for pointing to it. If anyone else shows up in Miami, I’d be glad to meet and cooperate if that’s appropriate.

        Corrections on the blog are very welcome.

        Friday, a 13-member jury was selected (yes, they can do that, it means they could lose up to 7 members and still complete the trial.

        • Jerry Soloman

          Thanks for the unbiased update Abd, your words will be given added value to the book if you keep it balanced.

        • Ged

          You were directly paid by IH in the past. Your past collusion with and previous extreme bias in favor of IH is well known and part your history.

          That doesn’t mean you aren’t doing a proper and good job now, and we are thankful and supportive of your rightfully factual reporting. This is your redemption arc after some of the downright “irrational” and false fanfiction you used to write about this case last year. All is forgiven, and I hope you persevere to stay on this applaudable path of matter-of-fact and neutral reporting. It matters not who comes out on top, only that the truth is known for what it is.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            I have never been paid a penny by IH, nor by anyone connected with IH. If you want to extend that to everyone connected with LENR, it would not be true. I have received donations from scientists and other interested parties, including more than one major long-term investor in the field (not in IH, at least not yet).

            GED, you are repeating lies or false speculations as if they are fact. Dr. Rossi once stated that I was paid… Sifferkoll also took this up, tossing in racial and religious prejudice. You discredit yourself by repeating these things as if fact. What has happens is that those with strong beliefs and strong agenda scour the record looking for proof of something, interpreting everything according to their already-established beliefs. When they find something that looks like mud, they toss it, and then others repeat it as fact.

            If I have erred as to fact, the blog is open for comment, and corrections are welcome. If you disagree with my opinions, your opinion may be discussed.

            Have I ever “colluded” with IH? I have received direct communication from people connected with IH, and, as a writer and reporter, I keep all such communications confidential. I have received no promises, assurances, or offers of future benefit. There has been nothing that, if revealed, would be seen as improper, and the situation is similar to that of Jed Rothwell, who refused to reveal his source for Penon data, beyond claiming that it came from Rossi (i.e., from someone who told him it was from Rossi.) If that were revealed it could cause harm to an informant. This is not “collusion”. It is normal information-gathering. I do not pass on confidential information without permission and I do not claim it as fact unless I verify it independently. (When I claim fact, I will normally give sources for verification. I may also report hearsay, attributed — which would normally be disallowed in court testimony, but will often be used by historians.)

            Any opinion that I report is just that, opinion. I have not been paid or even asked to give anything other than testimony to what I see and know, in addition to my honest opinions, and all finding has been provided without any conditions placed on what I write. No biased reporting has been solicited.

          • Free free to drop the names of ” donations from scientists and other interested parties, including more than one major long-term investor in the field (not in IH, at least not yet)”.

            I think that it is common practise for “institutes” to reveal their funding.

          • cashmemorz

            Here it is. This gets to the heart of why I say: it is all about us blogger individuals. Opinion is also based on fact as well as innuendo. Because that is the way it is, then it is up to us individuals to make this whole LENR thing go in the right direction. Even if we do get irrefutable evidence in favor of LENR, it is still up to us to bring this out. If all that a news media does is to put down the truth, for the powers that be, then it is up to us to uncover that propaganda for what is. It is all up to us, to make of it into a positive thing.

        • There is a saying that the mouth speak of what the heart is filled with and if one was to apply that to you it gets quite clear you are not “focused” on LENR commercialization or the science rather than the IH Vs Darden courtcase which is what you cover 95% + .

          The infusion institute is at least as unreal as the JMP, there is no community (or institute), only you and interested parties with various interests supporting you. This is a figment of your imagination to make yourself look credible.

          It’s not true your blog is partially neutral information, when you posted about the opening statements you wrote walls of information against Rossi from the opening statements and totally left IH out. Everything you write is very one sided.

          When alleged facts from involved parties has been posted, which has been proven completely and utterly wrong you have not done anything whatsoever to cover that, because it does not fit in with the one-sided narrative.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Thanks for sharing, Dr. Bob. If something is missing on, how about supplying it?

            It is true that the commercialization of cold fusion is not the focus of Infusion Institute, which is focused on the science, and III was explicitly created as “Plan B,” as a way forward for LENR, in case Plan A did not work, Plan A is that LENR devices show up at Home Depot — or otherwise become available for independent testing, with reliability demonstrated. Plan B was not opposed to Plan A. Plan A, if successful, might make Plan B far more accessible. I am also in communication with LENRIA, explicitly focused on commercial applications.

            Plan B is in conformance with the recommendations of both U.S DoE reviews, and has support both from “believers” and “skeptics.” But not from fanatics on either side. I’m happy, and, meanwhile, I’m having fun. I enjoyed meeting Dr. Rossi, smiling at him and being smiled at. I’ve enjoyed the same with Darden and Vaughn, with numerous counsel there. This is really fun! Being sent money is also fun! I’m not making a profit, and none of the money has had strings attached, so far, just notes of appreciation and positive suggestions (like putting a link on the blog home page to the GoFundMe page). Many have, who apparently disagree with my opinions, said they don’t mind me expressing my opinions if I don’t eliminate the factual reporting, and if I do that, I hope that people will complain!

            Meanwhile, I’m surprised that you think there is no neutral information on CFC. Look at the docket and case files page, a major and long-term effort. There is nothing else like it on the internet. On that page, there is a section on “Neutral Analysis.” A few of those pages contain opinion, which is set off and temporary. When I was compiling the information, i would have something to say, and it is far more efficient if I just say it immediately, when I have the claims and evidence in front of me. The plan is to later create a page with that purged, as the neutral analytical resource, and leave the opinion page as that.

            The Rossi Complaint/IH Answer and IH Countercomplaint/Rossi Answer merges were quite a bit of work, but understanding the case without seeing the documents merged, or at least side-by-side, as attorneys likely to (with printouts) would be very difficult. What happens with people who don’t do that work is that they are stuck, generally, with what they already believe. They are unlikely to remember the rest.

            The MSJs are ridiculous to try to understand without support, they are full of references to exhibits. What I created was a merge of the IH MSJ, where all the references become links to the exhibits, likewise the Rossi objections are merged, with links the same. I have not finished putting in the third party objections, and I forget about the IH Reply. The judge ruled and it. Evans largely moot, but the process left me thoroughly familiar with the evidence.

            If you think that my study if the IH MSJ show prejudice, I can understand that. However, I actually started with the Rossi MSJ first, but ran into severe problems with how Rossi numbered his exhibits, making the exhibit number different from the attachment number.

            There is another problem now: Annesser filed a wrong document and has not corrected this in spite of clerk instructions. As well, IH filed a document containing all depositions that they plan to use, with detailed annotations; Annesser and Chaiken claimed technical difficulties prevented their filing the corresponding document, so knowing what Rossi is preparing is much more difficult than for IH. They said they would hand-deliver this to the court, which may put them in violation of rules and a court order, I’m not sure.

    • CNN, MSNBC, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and the Washington Post are leaders in investigative journalism and holding elected officials accountable for their words and deeds.

      A courageous fourth estate with integrity is vital to the survival of our republic.

      If you believe all of those outfits, each of which explicitly devotes itself to truth and informing the public, are spewing lies then it’s likely you have fallen prey to propaganda.

      • The Wall Street Journal is generally pretty good, but the other entities you mention are propaganda machines gone loony. I am not referring to any coverage of LENR or Rossi, but of their general news and politics coverage. Biased political opinion is not “news”.

        • Omega Z

          Aside from promoting an agenda, They are also notorious for click bait on the internet.

      • Ciaranjay

        While it is nice to think of the news media working hard to get to the truth this is as simplistic as thinking our politicians are just trying to represent their voters.
        To some extent it is true but the reality is not so simple;
        They are a business so they have limited resources, boots on the ground etc so they rely on stuff that gets fed to them and also limited resources to check the facts.
        Every organization is biased to some degree, they can’t help it, media has power, media has owners.
        Politics is a dirty game and each side tries to influence the news, in the UK the BBC regularly gets attacked for being partisan by both right and left.

        Additionally they all have to pander to their niche audience. So if the audience wants conspiracy theories about UFOs then that is what sells.
        At least the big organizations are held to some standards and can be investigated but even those that are the most “truthful” and “accurate” have to decide what gets printed and what gets left out.
        The worst are just comics for adults with smut, inuendo and lies.

      • Jerry Soloman

        LENR G there are many that really believe every word that CNN, MSNBC, Wall Street Journal, New York Times and the Washington Post write. but we now now they are Very faKe News.

        • If that is what you truly believe then I truly believe you have fallen prey to propaganda.

          Review who is telling you these news outlets are unreliable. Then ask yourself what those entities have to gain from your loss of trust in legitimate news. Then consult the USIC findings on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    • Omega Z

      Abd is also anti Rossi. He just does it in a low key manor most of the time…

      • cashmemorz

        Until such time as unrefutable evidence is in play in favor of Rossi, anything goes, pro or con Rossi, as well as pro and con Industrial Heat/Cherokee et al. So it is not about Rossi or IH but, so far, about US guys as individuals as well as the individual jurors sitting in the case, trying to make head or tail about the whole E-Cat/cold fusion thing. This requires input from all sides, even out to the boondocks such as, with my apologies, GeorgeHants, Abd and good old bland me. How will that jury decide who is telling the most that is in favor of the relevant side?

    • Chapman

      I can’t believe it!
      A complement to Abd that I can wholeheartedly endorse!
      Never woulda thunked it in a million years…
      But I would rather read Abd all day long than watch CNN and MSNBC.

      You, Mr. “Bear1145”, have forced me to alter my perspective in regards to Abd.
      That is no insignificant achievement!!!

      • Chapman

        In fact, in recognition of the MAGNITUDE of the import of your observation, I hereby solemnly forswear the continued use of the “Lummox” monicker, and will attempt to afford him a greater degree of respect in the future – As long as he does not blow it, and go off the deep end again and just start gratuitously bashing Rossi for kicks…

        • Ged

          You enunciate my fears well, but like you I am tepidly willing to trust. I firmly believe people can grow and better themselves, afterall, and that the past can be left behind for new beginnings.

          • Chapman

            I stop scratching once the itch goes away.
            And I don’t hold grudges.
            I believe in redemption, and a person’s right to change course and be taken on face value based upon that new direction.

            I was being sincere when I said I would lay off him, not just publicly, but within my own mind and attitudes.
            I am perfectly happy to see someone reform!
            I say God Bless him if he has seen the light and mended his ways.
            He will suffer no continued abuse from me.


    • Jerry Soloman

      Well said Bear the FaKe news with CNN & MSNBC have reached new levels of absurdity,
      lets see if Abd can deliver without being to bias as he has in the past.

  • Andy Kumar

    Checking in after a long time. Waiting to see the reaction of the regulars here when the verdict comes in.

    • Ged

      It is the 4th of July holiday stretch for Americans, so fireworks and explosions will definitely be in vogue.

    • Mats002

      What defines a regular here?

  • Engineer48

    Some details of the initial shots fired by IH & Rossi:

    Law360, Miami (June 30, 2017, 9:57 PM EDT) — An Italian inventor suing over an $89 million licensing agreement for an energy catalyzer patent opened trial Friday in Miami, telling jurors that the licensees had repeatedly touted the technology and said it had “potential to change the world” before reneging on the agreement.
    Brian Chaiken of Perlman Bajandas Yevoli & Albright PL, who represents Italian inventor Andrea Rossi, told the jury that Rossi and his Leonardo Corp. are owed $89 million from licensees Cherokee Investment Partners LLC and related entity Industrial Heat LLC, which boasted about acquiring the technology for a low-energy nuclear reactor called the E-Cat through a 2012 agreement, but failed to live up to their end of the deal.

    “They wasted no time telling investors and potential investors that E-Cat actually works and that they were in possession of the technology,” Chaiken said.

    At one point, in an investment memorandum, International Heat said the future success of the company was dependent on one key individual: Rossi, according to Chaiken.

    “They’re telling their investors they’ve got LeBron James on their team and if they’re going to the NBA Finals, they’re going to ride him all the way there,” he said.

    But International Heat changed its tune in May 2015, he said, when it successfully sold 4 percent of the company for $50 million. After that investment, Chaiken said the narrative changed, and the company began to say that Rossi was unreliable and that the test results of his E-Cat technology were unreliable.

    Christopher Pace of Jones Day — who represents International Heat, Cherokee, its founder Thomas Darden and manager John T. Vaughn — told jurors a different story, one in which his clients were deliberately lied to regarding the performance of the E-Cat.

    Under the terms of the 2012 agreement, totaling $100 million, International Heat was supposed to make three payments: first, a $1.5 million payment to buy the E-Cat equipment, then a $10 million fee for the technology, and finally an $89 million payment once the equipment passed performance tests after 400 days of operation.

    That performance test allegedly took place in a warehouse in Doral, Florida, but Pace told jurors the whole thing was a sham.

    He said his clients let Rossi take the equipment from North Carolina, where the defendants are located, to Florida because Rossi said he had found a customer that wanted to use the E-Cat and could test it in a real-world scenario. Rossi told them the customer, JM Products, was an affiliate of Johnson Matthey, a U.K.-based multinational chemical company.

    But Pace said his clients later discovered that JM Products was a sham company set up by third-party defendant Henry Johnson at the direction of Rossi.

    Pace told jurors that his clients tried to gain access to JM Products’ warehouse but were blocked and told that the company was engaged in a secretive manufacturing process. When International Heat finally got an engineer into the warehouse, they found clear problems, he said.

    The amount of water that Rossi claimed the E-Cat machines were turning into steam each day — about 9,000 gallons — was impossible, because at most, the pumps available there could pump only 5,000 gallons of water per day, Pace said. International Heat had also called Florida Power & Light to check on the electricity records for the warehouse and found discrepancies with what Rossi was reporting, according to Pace.

    He said the defendants acknowledged to investors that Rossi was a risk because of previous failed business ventures and a reputation for being difficult, but they gave him latitude because they felt that he had a remarkable technology that produced clean energy cheaply. Pace argued that it is Rossi who should refund the $11 million paid out by the defendants because of the lies he told them.

    “Those E-Cat boxes weren’t filled with magic,” he told jurors. “They were simply filled with lies.”

    The trial, which got off to a rocky start after the first jury was dismissed Thursday, is slated to last five weeks.

    Leonardo and Rossi are represented by John W. Annesser, Brian Chaiken and D. Porpoise Evans of Perlman Bajandas Yevoli & Albright PL.

    The defendants are represented by Christopher R.J. Pace, Christopher M. Lomax and Christina Mastrucci of Jones Day.

    The case is Andrea Rossi et al. v. Thomas Darden et al., case number 1:16-cv-21199, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

    –Editing by Catherine Sum.

    • GiveADogABone

      1: ‘The amount of water that Rossi claimed the E-Cat machines were turning into steam each day — about 9,000 gallons — was impossible, because at most, the pumps available there could pump only 5,000 gallons of water per day’
      Rated flow is stated at the rated backpressure. Drop the backpressure and the maximum flow rate of the pumps increases.

      2: ‘Pace said. International Heat had also called Florida Power & Light to check on the electricity records for the warehouse and found discrepancies with what Rossi was reporting, according to Pace.’
      The readings from the FP&L meter are likely to be from a limited, standard, permanent, 2-phase supply to the warehouse. This supply fed the low power electrics for the E-cat container and the fans for the mezzanine heat exchanger, as well at the lights, air-conditioning, etc.

      The additional, 3-phase supply to the E-cat power circuits would have been sized for a maximum expected demand of 166kW. Rossi has stated that the supply was rated at 300kW. The actual 3-phase demand was about 10-15kW and this was not supplied through the FP&L, 2-phase meter.

      IH are comparing two different things IMHO.

      3: ‘Pace argued that it is Rossi who should refund the $11 million paid out by the defendants because of the lies he told them.’
      I do not buy this. The only possible reason for a refund would be that the ERV report was demonstrably falsified. IH and Rossi agreed in the Licence Agreement to abide by the ERV’s report.

      Points 1: and 2: above feed into the central calculation of the ERV report, the CoP being the heat out divided by the electricity in. The ERV said 60-80 for the CoP and IH say 1. IH need something a lot more persuasive than 1: and 2: to falsify the ERV report by a ratio of 60-80 IMHO.

      4: I wonder why IH did not lead with their first sentence in their ‘Statement of the Case’ that ‘Plaintiffs claim to have invented a technology called the “E-Cat” capable of violating the law of conservation of energy by producing far more energy than it consumes.’?
      A persuasive argument for CoP=1?
      Maybe IH learnt something during discovery?

      • Engineer48

        Hi GADAB,

        Clearly IH’s lawyers are stating what engineers know is very conditional data but not stating the conditions, such as pump flow rate is dependent on back pressure and inlet pressure. As we know the pump manuf has stated that with very little back pressure, the flow rate on that pump can be multiples of the stated 2 barg flow rate.

        Not nice for the IH lawyers to intentionally present misleading data, knowing the jury will not know the flow data is conditional on setup and can be multiples of the stated flow rate.

        Lets hope the IH lawyers will stop making limited and conditional statements while not stating the conditions and limitations.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Some COP values for a throughput of 5000 gallons (18927 litres) per day, at 10 kW input, deltaT = 30 degrees and various evaporation rates:

          %Steam – COP

          0 – 2.75
          3 – 4.23
          7 – 6.21

          If I recall it correctly, COP 4 was the minimum for a partial payment (full payment would require COP 6). That is, they would have to prove that significantly less than 3% of the water had been turned into steam (if the other numbers are correct).

          • Engineer48

            Hi AM,

            Yup for sure.

            At 5,000 gallons per day, +100C superheated steam at 1 atmo, the 1MW plant would still meet the min COP for Rossi to be paid the $89m.

          • GiveADogABone

            Andreas + E48,
            Whilst your numbers may be right, you have highlighted a major problem which I had not spotted when I posted:

            1 US liquid gallon = 3.7854 litre
            35,000 litres/day = 35,000/3.7854 = 9246 gallons/day
            35,000 litres/day is about the full water flow rate of the E-cat at a power of 1MW heat.

            The CoP calculation is :-
            CoP = Eout / Ein = (mass flow rate x specific enthalpy change) / (elec power in)

            What the IH lawyer did with his opening statement is highlight the IH claim that the water flow stated in the ERV report was ‘impossible’. He also highlighted the ‘electrical power in’ as questionable. The issue of specific enthalpy change was avoided.

            Who cares what the specific enthalpy change might be, if the water flow rates quoted in the ERV report are WRONG? If the quoted water flow rates are WRONG, then the ERV report is FALSE and IH make their case: the ERV report is a fake.

            The pumps have to be shown to be able to deliver 35,000 litres/day (9000 US gallons/day) at the reduced, operational backpressure, in order to refute the IH claim.

            I do offer an opinion that IH will attack the ‘specific enthalpy change’ at some point as well. This would be their ‘steam pipes were operated flooded’ argument.

          • Engineer48

            Hi GADAB,

            In private email discussion with Rossi on the 4 banks of 6 pumps, he stated there were just topping up pumps to maintain an accurate water level in the reactors and the bulk of the water flow was supplied by another master pump. We have seen that pump was inside the Black JM container.

            This assumes there may be another inlet to each of the Tigers or the master pump created enough inlet pump positive pressure to increase the flow rate of the 24 smaller pumps to the necessary amount.

            I do note we have never seen the North side of the 4 x Tiger rack or the piping and/or inlets that may exist there.

            I say again that it does not generate positive respect for the IH lawyer that made the 5,000 g/d statement, without the qualifications that the value was based on 2 barg back pressure, while the operational back pressure was very close to 0 barg plus the 2.5 mtr high condensate headers would have resulted in positive inlet pump pressure such that the pumps would have been operating with negative back pressure.

            Basically the IH lawyer mislead the jury with the 5,000 g/d statement.

          • GiveADogABone

            search on ‘prominent’.
            The post is dated April 8, 2017 at 5:17 AM

            the Prominent pump , as every pump, has a flow rate that is in function of the hydraulic pressure: Mr Smith has hidden to the readers the fact that in the same photo that he reports in his “expertise” is clearly written that the pressure is 2 Bar at the flow of 36 liters per hour !!! Obviously if the pressure is lower, the flow rate increases. I have personally used that model of Prominent pump and at a pressure of 0.2 Bars its flow rate is about 90 liters per hour. If we look well the photo of the pumps system of the E-Cat we can see that the pumps have to raise the water of few tens of centimeters, while 2 Bars correspond to 20 meters !!!! At a rate of 90 liters per hour, the maximum flow rate of all the pumps combined is well above the 1,600 liters per hour necessary to the E-Cat to reach a rate of about 1 MW.

          • Engineer48

            HI GADAB,

            In this image Prominent says the same thing:

            “When metering at atmospheric pressure the pump can achieve several times the stated feed rate.”


            Maybe the IH lawyer suffers from the same convenient loss of vision problem as does Smith and others?

          • GiveADogABone

            Enough evidence that the IH lawyer’s opening remarks in regard to pump flow rates were false? I would say yes.

          • Engineer48

            HI GADAB,

            The IH lawyer would cover his backside by saying the pump flow rate he stated is from the IH Expert Smith’s report.

            Then the issue is why Smith was not aware of the document I posted, nor seemingly unaware that pump flow rate has a negative correlation with back pressure. Higher back pressure = lower pump flow rate and lower back pressure = higher pump flow rate. Would expect that anyone calling themselves an expert on boilers and the like should know that.

            It is on the Prominent web site and has been posted here before.

          • GiveADogABone

            The issue for IH turns out to be that the lie transmitted by Smith to Pace knocks out all Smith’s testimony in just the same way as accepting a flow of 5000 US gallons/hr would knock out the ERV report. Consequence: total case collapse for IH.

          • Bruce__H

            That is interesting. Ele on LENR forum has made exactly the same claim.

            It looks as though this part of IH’s case is crumbling. I am amazed. Given that the pumps being inbsufficient to deliver the claimed flow has been introduced right at the beginning of the court case I would have thought that someone at IH would have bought one of these pumps and tried it out.

          • GiveADogABone

            As we now know it was not ‘part of IH’s case’ that crumbled, it was the whole thing. The question is why. It took a while for the significance to appear.

            There is Rossi’s statement which is clear and then there is Prominent Pump’s statement in the pump manual copyout that E48 posted : ‘When metering at atmospheric pressure the pump can achieve SEVERAL TIMES the stated feed rate.’

            IH’s lawyer mislead(I am being polite) the second jury with his opening remarks about this. Where did the lawyer get this lie (which is what it was when it arrived at the jury)? From Rick Smith’s evidence. That eliminates Rick Smith and his testimony from the case. What else has IH got to prove that the ERV report is a fake? Nothing. Consequence: total case collapse .

          • Bruce__H

            I can’t figure out why everyone here thinks that IH’s case collapsed when nothing is known about the settlement.

            I’ve checked back on LENR forum as far as I can (back to May 17) and can’t find the poster called ele making the claim about personally experiencing 90 L/m with the Prominent pumps at 0.2 bar back-pressure. So I may have misremembered the identity of the poster.
            Nonetheless I am interested in whether these are independent reports of high metering that I have seen or just one. Was it you who mentioned 90 L/m on LENR Forum?

          • GiveADogABone

            I have never posted on LENR Forum and never will.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Bruce,

            Doesn’t matter as Prominent, the metering pump manufacturer, have made a similar statement.

            “When metering at atmospheric pressure the pump can achieve several times the stated feed rate.


            So there you have it. Based on the statement from Prominent, both Smith and the IH lawyer made incorrect and misleading statements about the flow rate of the pumps.

            Which could imply the Rossi legal team could easily show the entire Smith document and the IH lawyer statement were false.

            Not good that the IH lawyer made a flow statement based on the min flow rate with a 2 Barg back pressure and Prominent saying the flow at 0 Barg (1 atmosphere pressure as was the steam outlet pressure) can be several times the stated 2 Barg flow rate.

            Good enough?

          • Bruce__H

            The pumps on the Tigers do not have a 2.5 m head of condensate. You have tried to make that argument in the past and I have shown you that there is no photograph of them that would support that. Instead, what every photograph, and the statements of Penon and Smith, support is that the Prominent pumps need to lift the condensate from near the floor of the red ECat container up and into the Tigers. So none of what you say has a foundation in independent evidence. Instead, the only support for what you say is Rossi and in the past you have called Rossi a liar.

            I see you scolding others for not paying attention to evidence. I’m not sure how you reconcile this with your own behaviour. In the past, whenever I have introduced what you consider persuasive evidence against one of your claims, you suddenly cut off communication and pretend you haven’t seen it. I mean … how do you think ignoring evidence gets you closer to reality here?

          • Bruce__H

            Engineer48 said:
            ” … the bulk of the water flow was supplied by another master pump. We have seen that pump was inside the Black JM container.”

            This is not quite accurate. We have not seen that the pump was “inside the Black JM container” and Rossi has never said that it was. Instead, in photograph of the inside of the black JM container in Smith’s second report, no pump visible in the condensate line. Since the photograph was supplied by Rossi this must be the configuration that Rossi wanted people to see. Non pump (as far as I know, no one from IH has ever seen inside of the JM container. The reality of this situation is that a pump was found under the stairs on the JMP side of the Doral facility and the IH consultants believe it was used in the condensate return line.

            The public claim that “.. the bulk of the water [going into the Tiger units] was supplied by another master pump” has a single source. You. Penon does not say it. Rossi does not say it publicly. The IH engineers who went over the Doral site do not say it. No one else who has any connection with the Doral test says it.

            Note: material in square brackets is my insertion for the purpose of clairity

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Since Defendants admit the possibility of a flow of 5000 gallons per hour, they concede at the same time that the COP could have been easily greater than 1 – even if there was no steam at all, and the power consumption was twice as high as reported. A minimum COP significantly above 1 would indicate that the device worked to a certain extent – and if it did so, why should it have been unable to produce at least a little steam?

            The problem seems to be how to explain such technical details to the jury. I do not expect too much from the attorneys in this regard.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            5000 gallons per day, of course.

          • Engineer48

            Hi AM,

            The 24 Prominent pumps can do the necessary flow as the back pressure was basically the outlet steam pressure or 0 barg or basically no back pressure on the pumps.

            To that issue Prominent clearly state the pump, at atmo back pressure, will achieve several times the rated feed rate. Here are their words.


            So sorry IH but the flow was what the flow meter recorded. And being the pumps are highly accurate computer controlled metering pumps, the flow rate will be the same boring value, day in and day out as that is what they are designed to do.

            Anyone who calls that into dispute is not an engineer as they do not understand what metering pumps are and why they are designed to deliver the same flow.

            What Jed and others calls impossible to be the same flow value day after day, really just exposes their lack of knowledge and understand of what modern metering pumps can achieve.

            I mean if the flow from a high quality metering pump is NOT the same day after day, the engineer in charge either changes the pump or calls the pump manufacturer to complain.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Yes, I know, but I think I have demonstrated above that this question is not decisive. To me, it looks as if they made a big mistake with their “5000” figure.

          • Engineer48

            Hi AM,

            The IH lawyers seem to be following the Smith report. If they continue to do that Rossi’s lawyer should be able to easily discredit the IH lawyer’s data as the Smith report is at best very questionable engineering and at worst just rubbish. If he can’t, I and other here sure can.

          • GiveADogABone

            An accepted 5000 gallons per hour flow would concede the fact that the ERV report was a fake; it states about 35,000 litres/day (9000 US gallons/hour) at full power. That discredits ALL the data in the report.

          • Engineer48

            Hi GADAB,

            Excellent point.

            Rossi’s lawyers need to show the 5,000 g/d figure is wrong and do it very soon.

            If you guys are reading this forum and you should be as you have some excellent FREE engineering support, this proves Smith’s claimed max flow is incorrect:


          • Andreas Moraitis

            Sorry, but I disagree. A report that contains a measurement error would not be “fake”, except if that error had been produced intentionally. And an error that affects a single parameter would not at all nullify the rest of the data.

          • Engineer48

            Hi AM,

            This is a jury trial. The IH lawyers only need to convince the jurors that the ERV report is flawed to allow IH to win.

            I agree with GADAB that this is the 1st salvo fired to discredit the ERV report. Simple reality is if the ERV report stands then Rossi wins. If it falls then IH wins.

          • GiveADogABone

            You have arrived at the core of this case in the technical arena :-
            CoP = Eout / Ein = (mass flow rate x specific enthalpy change) / (elec power in)
            as reported in the ERV report. It provides a list of three things that IH must attack to discredit the ERV report.

            We have already had water flow-measuring turbines whirling away in air, flooded steam pipes and no superheaters. Attacking the pump rated flow rate is just naff. Murray conceded that he had no evidence that the electrical power readings had been manipulated. What next? IH have a serious ammunition shortage.

            You conclusion bears repeating, “… if the ERV report stands then Rossi wins. If it falls then IH wins.”. Exactly!!

    • Frank Acland

      I am pleasantly surprised to find this kind of reporting on the trial by Law 360 (However someone should tell them it’s Industrial Heat, not International Heat). I hope they keep up these reports throughout the trial.

      • GiveADogABone

        There seems to be a payment issue after seven days. I doubt it would be ethical to make one payment and then post the Law360 material for all to see.

  • sam

    From Abd blog

    Meanwhile, I committed to coming here when I had received funding adequate to cover two weeks. I arrived on Sunday, June 25, to be ready for trial start the 26th. I learned before leaving the trial would not start until the 28th. Altonaga today said that the trial is expected to end the week of July 24. That would be on or before July 28. I need to pay for up to 21 more days of housing, at about $60 per day. So … while I do have some informal commitments that might possibly cover this, it would be an assurance if the GoFundMe campaign gets more support. As well, aside from any actual contributions, telling others about this blog, and about the fundraising effort, can really help. Thanks

  • Andy Kumar

    It will be a while before the trial is over. Can we take a poll to see what the readers expect.

    a) Rossi vindicated, IH has to pay up.
    b) Rossi found guilty, returns $11M to IH.
    c) Rossi found not guilty by reason of insanity or confirmation bias. Gets to keep some of the money for good faith effort.

    • D) Split the baby decision. Rossi gets to keep his worthless IP and refunds IH. Status Quo Ante Bellum. No one is satisfied.

      • Fibber McGourlic

        Rossi offered to do that a long time ago and IH refused his offer. Rossi wants the 98 million, IH wants the I.P. They might have let the trial proceed in hopes of reducing the cost of the I.P. I can’t think of another explanation for the situation.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          I have seen no confirmation that Rossi offered a refund. As I recall, Dewey Weaver, who is not IH, but a contractor for them and one of the investors, mentioned something about a refund on LENR Forum, then someone asked Rossi about it on JONP, and the appearance was created that there had been an offer that IH refused.

          Before the suit was filed, IH had given $11.5 million directly to Rossi, and about half that to Ampenergo, plus millions of dollars in expenses. The basic IH claim is two-fold: either the technology is fake OR Rossi kept secrets, did not reveal how to make devices that work. And then IH is claiming that Rossi set up conditions such that the one-year test was not independent, and Rossi did not allow the IH engineer to observe Plant operation during the test, as a clear violation of the Term Sheet. Rossi, in his Answer, claimed that Murray was a spy, which speaks volumes. We will start to see evidence Wednesday.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Abd,

            Rossi has stated the offer was made. It was Weaver and not IH that denied the offer was made. If IH confirmed the offer was made and they rejected it, well that would not good for IH, so why expect IH to confirm something with would hang them?

            As for the test, if you wish to debate the engineering of the 1MW plant, you will find there are very knowledgeable engineers here who will engage.

            IH had 2 paid staff engineers at the 1 year trial.

            From what I have read, I don’t believe Murray had the engineering skills to be a spy. He seems to have vision issues and missed the big ceiling exhaust fan above the JMP work area while supporting Jeds claim of overheating the warehouse. Then he ran tests on partly filled flow meter pipes, following the now proven false Jed theory.

            I would not consider Murray or Smith as credible non biased engineers. The reports they produced confirm that.

            So far I have not seen anything that any IH expert has reported as being credible, when judged against the photographic evidence.

          • Rossi has stated the offer was made.
            ***Where? I thought I saw the same thing on his JONP but I can’t find it. I know that Rossi deletes items from JONP. I once asked him something about what his plans were for correcting the record because he had threatened to sue Wikipedia about the slander that was posted about him and Wikipedia corrected it. He answered my question and then a few days later the answer disappeared.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Kevmo,

            For sure sometime his postings are deleted on his blog.

            We and others did see it, so it was there.

          • I’m pretty sure it was there. It probably would come back to bite him in the ass, so he deleted it. Maybe the wayback machine has it.

          • Note: Wayback machine search function doesn’t work, so you’d have to read every Rossi item to find it if it’s there.

          • help_lenr

            I think that the claim about “refund offer” appeared in the blog of Mats Lewan, better ask him, I think that this is what Rossi told Lewan, No reliable documents about this (yet).

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            I am not about to enter into a debate about e-cat engineering here. Most of it would be speculation and argument about what cannot be verified at this time. What I can say here is that much E48 has said is unverifiable or misleading.

            As I stated, we do not have any confirmation of the alleged offer, and, as I recall, Rossi was reacting to the Weaver statement, misinterpreted. That IH might not “look good” is fluff, They spent probably $20 million on the Rossi affair, so what was Rossi allegedly offering? If it was $10 or $11.5 million, their investors might be less than thrilled, and it is their investor opinions they would care about, not random anonymous writers on the internet.

            IH did not have “two paid staff engineers” at the 1-year trial,” not as to the necessary expertise. Dameron functioned as an engineer, for a time, but he only visited the site briefly. The claim of there being “two IH men” at the site at all times comes from JONP, where the reference is to Barry West and Fulvio Fabiani, who were there, not to assess the test, but to assist Rossi. They did not have professional qualifications such that either one of them would be able to spot problems with the set-up. Fabiani had an obvious conflict of interest, read his deposition, he was caught between a rock and a hard place, if he was telling the truth in his emails with Murray. (Weaver may think he was lying. I am reluctant to conclude that on the evidence I have seen. Rather he appears to have been frightened and in the presence of that fear, made some poor decisions, to destroy evidence. Fear sometimes creates what we fear, if we react impulsively. Did he consult anyone? What if he consulted Rossi? Both of them destroyed — or lost? — emails.)

            Whether or not an anonymous alleged engineer thinks Murray is qualified is irrelevant, when presented as mere opinion. Anonymous commentary is free of the constraints of personal responsibility. The point here is that Rossi considered Murray a spy, which then betrays that Rossi had something to hide, whereas IH had a full right to E-cat technology and all related developments. So this is evidence supporting the IH alternative claim that Rossi did not make a complete disclosure, and under that theory, of course IH would not want to casually give up the license. This is usually stated as “giving up the IP,” but it is the license that matters. If Rossi then commercializes the invention, IH would be able to reverse engineer it from product, and have full rights to use it. E48, your understanding of the business aspects here is poor. The entire IH strategy, from the beginning, understood that it was risky dealing with Rossi, so they developed a plan to make the world safe for investment in LENR, as safe as it could be, given the difficulties (mostly about reliability). Basically, they bought it, for $11.5 million, allowing them to directly test it. The jury will hear that even though the time for the GPT had expired, IH was willing to pay if Rossi showed them how to make working devices.

            There are two alternate theories as to test failure. Murray pointed out possible flow meter failure, and this has a little evidentiary support. The meter was clearly inappropriate and the installation not according to specs. How far off the reported flow readings might be is controversial. But they could be off substantially. In my opinion, however, the error would vary with conditions, so this would not explain the consistent, unvarying flow reported by Penon. Jed is right about the Penon report, in that there are features of this report that raise red flags. Real engineering data simply doesn’t look like that. And Jed is expert on that.

            However, the Smith theory is that the system was flooded. This probably needs to be combined with pressure meter failure, and/or a temperature measurement problem. The truth became difficult to ascertain because of the extensive spoliation of evidence. However, studying and discussing E-cat reports in 2011, and as to what was understood then about how it operated, I expected that reactors would overflow to some degree. In the MW reactor system as we have it, with, apparently, fixed water flow, if only one reactor fails to boil all the input flow, the system would flood (through that reactor).

            What E48 calls “photographic evidence” is lack of evidence. Rossi will start to present evidence tomorrow. I already have opinions, because of what Rossi and IH have presented with attestation (something that E48 doesn’t seem to recognize as important — admissible evidence, as distinct from hearsay and speculation and conclusory claims), but I was already surprised by a couple of facts alleged by Chaiken, even though, in the end, they are moot. Maybe something won’t be. I was not surprised by anything in the Pace opening statement, it had all been disclosed before. However he boiled it down for the jury to one word. Fake, repeated many times. The emphasis is not what E48 might claim. Rather, fake presentation of Italian law to excuse a failure to follow validation test plans, fake independent customer presented as Johnson Matthew, then fake representations of what JM was saying, fake test by an engineer whose independence was fake, fake data, and on and on. It is a simple story, for a jury. It is the task of Rossi counsel to overturn that in favor of a conspiracy to defraud, involving many people, and with extremely thin to nonexistent evidence, only speculation. Tough row to hoe.

            By the way, some here have stated, as if it’s fact, that the license has been cancelled. Rossi has previously cancelled other licenses, and there is a comment on my blog from someone who had invested in a license that was cancelled. Rossi offered refund plus 10%. They accepted, and are still waiting for the money. He says.

            The License Agreement included no provision for cancellation. While a court could order cancellation under some conditions, that is not possible unilaterally providing the precedent conditions were met (I.e., payment of the $10 million that established the license). So IH, if they have a usable technology from Rossi, could use it, and could use Quark-X technology; the $89 million is, at best, a contingent debt, even if considered part of the payment for the license. There is no provision for revocation in the event of nonpayment of that sum, and if one thinks about it, such a provision would have drastically limited the ability of IH to profit from the technology by sub-licensing. If they profited, then presumably there would be assets to pay Rossi or to pay a judgment.

            If Rossi has a real technology, he allowed his paranoia to shoot him in the foot. He did that before in Italy, if we accept Lewan’s account. If people actually care about Rossi, I suggest becoming familiar with the evidence, all of it, don’t just focus on the “technology,” as if that is all that matters. Don’t forget people. People matter. We all need friends who will confront us when we go off the rails.

    • MorganMck

      This is a civil trial. A party is not found “guilty” or “not guilty,” there is only the awarding (or not) of monetary damages.

      • cashmemorz

        More like civil war. A kind of infighting between close relations based on insignificant differences. The differences, in hind sight, say in 20-30 years, will look like the big deal it wasn`t. Currently it looks like a big deal since no one knows how the E-Cat works. When it is figured out every would be physicist will be saying, “I had that on the tip of my tongue. If only….”

        • MorganMck

          All true. I hope the E-Cat works. I was once a true believer but the longer Rossi treads water (does nothing) and MFMP is unable to duplicate any claim the more discouraged I get. If Rossi really has the goods, the $89M would be such small potatoes that I would not think he would waste his time on it. But he does spend the time and shows nothing else (but talk) to the world. What a waste.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Morgan,

            Imagine Rossi, arriving at Cherokee to sign the license and at the last minute, Darden tells Rossi is deal is not with Cherokee but IH, that was registered 2 weeks before.

            Talk about bad faith from day one.

            Had I been Rossi, I would have RUN away from that deal, because if your partner that will have more than 50% of the world under their control does a nasty trick like that at the beginning, well you never will know what they will pull next.

          • toussaint francois

            Hi Enginner48,
            I think Rossi made a tragic mistake teaming up with IH, just after the Greecs .

            I can’t understand why he did not check them fully ?!

          • help_lenr

            He believe that he was under strong pressure in 2013 because he had no investors. This was in 2013 when the e-cat technology was suspected by many people (including me). Don’t confuse the evidence for e-cat now with the weak evidence for validity of e-cat back in 2013.

    • f sedei

      IH will never give up the IP, and they will come to an agreement and pay Rossi what is owed.

      • Chapman

        We are way beyond that point.

        IH no longer HAS any IP rights and had nothing to negotiate with. And let’s be honest, Rossi could win a record breaking judgement, but he will never see a penny. IH will dissolve, and Rossi would be left holding an IOU from a ghost.

        We all know who Darden and Cherokee are, and what their business practices are. This is not their first rodeo dealing with fraud charges leveled against them. It is ONLY because of the Woodford entanglement that IH has not already vaporized. This time Darden bit off more than he can chew, and international securities fraud issues will come into play.

        IH is fighting in order to avoid prosecution for scamming retired folks and running a con to steal their retirement funds… Darden is facing the same legal persecution as Mr. Madoff. The “Rossi Affair” will only be the first domino to tip and start a chain reaction as the DOJ looks into the long train of Bond Fraud and Falsified Bankruptcies Darden has left behind.

        Rossi is only fighting for reputation, and he knows he will never collect anything from them.

        I do not want to cast too big a shadow, and give the case more importance than it deserves, but you must keep in mind the recent shifts in American politics. The new administration would love to latch on to a victorious Rossi train. With the anti-AGW and America-First energy policies now in place, what could be better than shinning the national spotlight on a corporate environmentalist fraudster, and a case of the establishment elites trying to squash and suppress a poor american entrepreneur trying to bring a REAL alternative energy source to the masses? Rossi, if he wins and Darden bolts, would become the poster child for the fight against all the nonsense of the last 8 years. Folks would be reminded of Solyndra and all the green energy subsidy scams, the fake environmental protection groups that have taken so many billions in tax dollars, and they would all get lumped together with the AGW tax scams – and it would all be held up as proof that the solar energy and windmill investments were all scams and kickbacks to insiders.

        Mind you, I am not making that claim, or throwing around those accusations. I am saying that you need to look at the big picture and consider what CAN be made of the situation by an administration that is looking to discredit the policies of the previous “green” administration. And GOD HELP DARDEN if it is found that he ever contributed to Hillary or the DNC!!!

        Also, you must not ignore the fact that Rossi is in Florida! Who else calls Florida home? And how much real national recognition does the “Rossi” name have? Not much. So the individual who brings him to national attention would be able to present his story as if Rossi was their own personal discovery, and present the tech as a “win” for the current administration…

        • Engineer48

          Hi Chapman,

          Rossi is suing both Darden and Vaughn personally. A win for Rossi could bankrupt either or both.

          • Chapman

            Yeah. It will be interesting to see how deep the jury is willing to cut. They have some options in terms of assessing actual liability. I think it will really come down to whether or not they just see a simple contract dispute, or if they perceive malice and decide to really punish someone whose actions have offended them. Just look at the Gawker verdict!

            And gee, where was THAT jury??? FLORIDA!

            But of course, that is only if Rossi wins. It is a jury, and you never know for sure. Even the lawyers are often surprised at the verdict even though they are present through the entire proceedings.

          • See below for info request regarding a post from a year ago…

            Chapman Andy Kumar • a year ago [hush]​[hide comment]
            “Now they have bad blood between them. IH demanded their $12M back. Rossi preemptively filed the lawsuit in the hope that IH will settle for fear of embarrassment.”

            Andy, that statement is not just wrong, but SO wrong that I can only label it as an out and out LIE. All reports are that Rossi offered a refund, and to cancel the agreement in it’s entirety – because IH was not prepared to move forward to any useful marketing phase, and Rossi has no patience for hand wringing.

            Clearly, your statement is not a misunderstanding, or a bit of confusion on your part, but a direct, deliberate, and manipulative lie.

            Please feel free to hate Rossi all you want, that is your right. But do not come here and flat out LIE. We are all following the story, and are well aware of current events. All you have done is to “out” yourself for what you are…
            •Reply•Share ›

            Kevmo Chapman • a few seconds ago
            Hey Chapman:

            I’m looking for evidence that Rossi offered Industrial Heat a refund. I thought I saw it on JONP but it apparently isn’t there. Do you have a reference for this?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Kevmo,

            As far as I know this is a completely fictions statement:

            “Now they have bad blood between them. IH demanded their $12M back. Rossi preemptively filed the lawsuit in the hope that IH will settle for fear of embarrassment.”

            Please understand that on ECW, people do not post made up statements as on other forums.

            If you have proof that IH demanded Rossi to pay back the $11.5m, please post it, otherwise please stop posting fiction.

            BTW Rossi filed the lawsuit 14 days after the $89m payment was due and was not received. He waiting until IH had breached the license agreement and then followed up the lawsuit by sending IH notification their license was cancelled due to the no payment breach.

          • I was quoting Chapman’s post.

          • Chapman

            No problem Kevmo. Engineer has just had enough of BS nonsense and did not follow your train of thought.

            Let me look for an actual dated reference for the Rossi offer of refund. I believe it was actually in one of his early court submissions, which means it is a sworn statement.

            I will post it when I find it…

          • Unheard Beethoven

            Mats Lewan’s interview with Rossi, May 2016

            Quote :
            During summer 2015, IH offered Rossi to back out from the test and cancel it, with a significant sum of money as compensation. Rossi’s counter offer was to give back the already paid 11.5M and cancel the license agreement, but IH didn’t accept.

          • I thought I had seen Rossi comment on that, claiming he had offered to refund in exchange for getting the IP back. Others think they’ve seen it as well, but it seems to have disappeared off JONP.

            I know Rossi deletes items off JONP that might bite him in the butt later on. He deleted one of my exchanges.

            I had asked him if he had further plans for correcting the record after he had cleared things up with Wikipedia. (Basically once he had some money in his pocket he threatened to sue Wikipedia and they blinked.) Rossi wrote some kind of noncommittal response IIRC but the whole exchange has been deleted from the record.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Kevmo,

            My apologises.

            Kumar’s statement is still bad fiction and not how business is done on ECW.

          • Chapman


            Kevmo was making a reference to a post from Kumar from way back, and I had responded to KUMAR that his allegations were totally fictitious.

            Kevmo was asking me if I had a link to the actual citation where ROSSI, on the other hand, had volunteered to return I’;s money but was refused.

            He aint bashing Rossi, or making any false accusations here. He just posted his question with a complex paragraph arrangement is all. I understood him, but I was involved in the original exchange.

            No worries…

          • Engineer48

            Hi Chapman,


            Still good to see the folks on ECW do not put up with the stuff that is posted on other forums.

          • Chapman

            Oh AMEN, Brother… Preachin to the choir!

            I only get really nasty round HERE when I have ventured out and been readin the trash posted on other sites. Then I come back here to sanity and see something that echoes that other BS and I kinda go off.

            Luckily you guys tend to keep me in check. Plus, I learned to just stay away from the stuff that sets me off.

            My whole original feud with “certain other persons” was grounded on my having seen a lot of venomous postings by them on the other forums, and when they popped up in here and started to say the same things I really went Apesh&t crazy. I looked like I was being an ass and over reacting, but trust me, I was not.

          • I just got a 2 week ban from LENR forum. They “warned” me about responding to insults with insults but their warning system doesn’t work. They move a post to another thread and then post on that thread, but those posts do not generate any notification.

            Naturally, the person who insulted me got no warning. Purely one sided.

            The moderator even acknowledged that “some farm animals are more equal than others” in their forum.

            Anyways, I toned it down some (they even acknowledge that) and now they’ve bumped me for being “boorish”. I don’t see anything in their TOS about boorish posts, there was no warning about boorishness, no standard applied to anyone else, and that would certainly apply to a lot of posts already there. The simple fact is, they don’t like what I say. They’re making up rules on the fly.

            For instance, there was a guy over there who claimed to be a lawyer and started out by making a big deal about Penon not backing up his ERV report. But Penon’s deposition is in evidence, and this supposed lawyer didn’t even catch that but went out of his way to insult me (a layman, not a lawyer) on my legal acumen. When I responded to his insult with an insult, I was told to tone it down, but not the lawyer dude.

            Also, the lawyer dude offered to bet $10,000 which is illegal in the USA. Yes, a lawyer posted an illegal bet offer, but I’m the one who got booted for being boorish.

            So, yeah, I’m with ya that some BS sets me off and my BS detector is definitely blinking when I visit that site.

          • help_lenr

            I believe that the offer to refund by Rossi is not based on public documents (this is only the say of Rossi). Maybe Rossi will reveal in court the docunents about that “refun offer”, we have to wait and see.

        • help_lenr

          IH may evaporate but CHEROKEE may not.

          The question is wether the court will decide that CHEROKEE made a fake company IH in order not to pay losses of CHEROKEE (sort of scam). In that case CHEROKEE cannot avoid payment if IH fails in court (not easy case though.

          • Omega Z

            Cherokee could fail. They manage about $2 Billion in assets, but their gross income is near $20 Million a year. Net income is even less. Thus they never had the money to pay Rossi the $89M.

            And Yes, Cherokee files multiple LLC’s operation to shield Cherokee financially and allow the LLC’s to file bankruptcy. However, Rossi also filed against Darden directly.

          • So is this the battle of the fake LLC’s? IH has their fake ones to hide bankruptcy, Rossi has his fake Johnson Mathey lookalike LLC so that IH would go along with the plan. The jury is likely to handwave over the lot of it.

        • f sedei

          Any mere millions of dollars loss to either party will be outweighed by the billions of dollars potential to the sole owner of a working LENR. Possession is the key in this matter–not the money. The degree of IH greed is staggering, and they will lose this case.

      • Engineer48

        Hi F,

        I do think a settlement is on the cards.

        Can’t see Darden and Vaughn really risking personal bankruptcy. Can see them settling if the trail starts going badly for them.

    • clovis ray

      what the matter Kumar, getting nervous.
      It’s not Dr. R who needs vindication, he has done nothing wrong,
      he filed the charges remember, see engineer’s post above. the ones who have slandered Dr R over the years, well lets just say i wouldn’t want to be in their shoes.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Andy,

      b and c will not happen as they are not part of the process. a is up to the jury to decide.

      Might suggest if you want to engage in this, do it without bias and post realistic options.

      I could ask:

      1) what is the possibility that both Darden and Vaughn could become bankrupt?

      2) what is the possibility that IH and Cherokee could become insolvent and be wound up?

      You see those are real possibilities.

  • Engineer48

    Lest we forget.

    It was Rossi who sued IH and cancelled their licence for non payment.

    IH are in court because Rossi initiated it.

    • Chapman

      Hey Engineer!

      It occurred to me that Rossi not only needs to WIN his case, but he must then decide on a much more IMPORTANT issue – that being… WHICH CURRENCY TO DEMAND IN PAYMENT!!!

      To help him in his decision, I post the following link.

      I will leave it to you and Frank to argue about the fine details before forwarding a suitable recommendation to Mr. Rossi. 🙂

      • bitcoin, ha hah!

        • Chapman


          Can I get a memory stick with the QUEEN’S image to store my shares? Otherwise, I think the Aussies win! 🙂

          I mean, it’s WATERPROOF! Genius!!!
          (and Matt Parker say’s it’s best, so there you go…)

          • I don’t know much about bitcoin but my impression is that if you dumped $100k into it 5 years ago, you’d be a millionaire.

          • Omega Z

            However, If tomorrow no one wants bitcoin, you are just SOL.
            There is no one or anything backing it.

          • The same could be true of the US Dollar, or almost any currency for that matter.

          • Chapman

            Ahhh, but if I leave a US fiver, an Aussie fiver, and a memory stick with the equivalent value Bitcoin keys, in the pocket of my jeans, which will better survive a trip through my washing machine and dryer??? 🙂

          • Okay, let’s look at the other extreme. If you try to go through US or Aussie Customs with $5M in your suitcases, which one will get you thru without getting arrested?

          • Chapman

            ummmm….. I, uhhh… Well, there is…. OH! What if you…. wait a minute….

            CRAP!!! You got me!!! GOOD CATCH!!!
            YOU WIN!!! 🙂 Anonymity trumps durability AND style!
            I hadn’t considered THAT one!

            I owe you BIGTIME. That info will come in handy the next time I am traveling to Sydney with $5M and need to keep it on the down-low… !!!

  • Andrew


  • John

    I am hopeful the E-cat is the real deal and is transformation in the way we produce and use energy. As an engineer, I have doubts based on the basics of physics – conservation of energy. The key point that would convince me that this is truly a revolutionary device is showing where the energy produced by the E-cat was used. The E-cat was reportedly producing 1 MW of power. What work was performed? Where did the energy go?

    The energy question is different from the contractual obligations. My fear is that this case will be decided on whether the contractual obligations were satisfied (which technically it should be) and the scientific merits will become trivial, and lost in the legal proceedings. I continue to have hope in the E-cat, and even more hopeful that we will validation of the E-cat technology.

    • Engineer48

      Hi John,

      From what we, other engineers and myself have deduced, most of the energy was vented out the windows in the upper story via a fairly simple dual fan assisted heat exchanger. Some of the energy drove thermal processes inside the Black JM container.

      As for CofE, like all nuclear in nature reactions, the energy just moved from internal to the material to external heat. Is why the effect is called Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR). There are way too many papers and experimental data to doubt the effect does work and is real. But OK sure, no one has yet come up with a solid theory of why it works.

      • John

        I still have trouble understanding where the 1 MW of power went. Considering my home energy use is roughly 30 kW-hr per day, if the E-cat ran 24 hrs producing 24 MW -hrs, there is 800 times more energy being used than household uses in 1 day. That energy needs to be used to perform an equivalent amount of work or heat, and it seems unlikely this was the case. I remember reading the JM side of the building was just a small space with nothing notable from the outside (no noise, no exhaust stacks).

        • Engineer48

          Hi John,

          Here is the layout as deduced from what Rossi and others have stated. Notice the large roof exhaust fan directly above the JM work area. The existance of this exhaust fan has been ignored by Jed, Murray and Smith as they claim the 1MW of heat would have killed anybody in the warehouse. However with the reality of the exhaust fan, that theory dies.

          Here is the hole in the dry wall that the bypass steam pipe used to enter the upper story area. Strange that Smith reported he saw no holes in the dry wall that would allow a steam pipe to enter the upper story. Maybe another case of Smith having convenient vision issues?

          Rossi claims that there was a steam bypass in the JM Black Box that allow steam / heat not required by the processing going on inside the JM Black container to be discharged by the upper story heat exchanger.

          Interesting images above. It seems IH / Smith failed to take a photo of what was between images 11 and images 12. Rossi claims that is where the bypass valving was installed. Another case of IH experts having vision problems and choosing to ignore the inconvenient Elephant in the room?

          This somewhat complex arrangement was necessary as to satisfy the contract, the 1MW plant needed to output a steady 1MW.

          • John

            Do you know any more details of the heat exchanger? If that was used to dissipate the excess heat (not used by the process), that heat needs to go somewhere. 1 MW worth of heat seems much more than could have been vented, unless a powerful exhaust fan was used- which would have created detectable noise outside the building.

          • Engineer48

            Hi John,

            Rossi stated there were 2 x 25,000 CMH fans used on the heat exchanger. As to the noise try this unit. 50 – 68 dB


            Rossi has stated that some of the upper story windows, to allow the waste heat to vent to atmo, were removed.

          • John

            I did a quick calc and calculated the amount of air required is 158000 cfm. The two fans provide 50000cmh, that is per hour, equates to 834 cm per min, which is approx 23000 cfm. I assumed a differential temperature of 20 degees, but that wouldn’t account for a 158000 cfm vs 23000 cfm airflow rate. Bottom line is that 1 MW is a huge amount of energy that must be used as work or heat.

          • Engineer48

            Hi John,

            You might want to review past posts where these calcs have been done to death.

            Rossi’s expert, a well published professor in thermal system, did calcs for both the heat exchanger and for the heat in the warehouse.

            Both calcs showed all was ok.

            Not at my main computer or would post his report. Maybe someone else can do that for me?

          • Engineer48

            Hi John,

            Here is the expert opinion, from Dr. Wong, Rossi’s expert, on the statements of Murray and Smith plus calculation on the upper story heat exchanger:


            Dr Wong’s conclusions:


          • AdrianAshfield

            Smith testified he had never visited the site, so he was going with information supplied to him by others.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Adrian,

            Smith stated he did visit the site with the IH lawyers who made him climb the stairs to the upper story before them, so they could see it was safe.

            He also stated he found no holes in the dry wall that could have allowed a steam pipe to enter. Guess he missed this fairly obvious hole, which is the size needed to allow a steam pipe to enter the upper story.


            He also missed seeing the patch of clear floor at the north side of the door way, which indicated there was either piping or electrical cables there and thus protected the floor from being walked on.


            Plus Smith failed to report on the existence of a big roof exhaust fan that was directly over the JM work area. Big enough to destroy the Jed originated theory the warehouse would have been so hot that humans would be killed working in there.


            Then as Jed’s 1/2 filled flow meter pipe theory was destroyed, the next invention was there was no steam and all that circulated was hot water, despite the steam temp meter recording in excess of 100C steam.

            You see when the engineering behind Smith’s various claims is examined, nothing stacks up except that Smith seems to have a vision issue that only allows him to see what fits the needs and not see other things that are a inconvenient truth. The images are clear and contradict Smith’s report.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            That was his first report. He followed up with a second report after his visit, after he was able to visit — as E48 points out. This points up that reading only some of the evidence can lead us astray. Any of us. And, in fact, if one looks at the Rossi list of what he plans to introduce, it is gargantuan compared to the IH list, and most of it, the public has not seen and has no clue. That means us. I write from what I have seen, and there may be little IH will introduce that I have not seen. I know I was familiar with everything mentioned in the IH opening. There were evidences mentioned in the Rossi opening that I had not seen. From the point of view of the Rossi narrative claiming fraud, they might seem important, and that is surely why they were mentioned in the only opportunity to frame the evidence before it is presented to the jury; however, from my overall understanding, they were moot and, should Rossi manage to convince the jury on those points, there would be appealable error, and it would simply waste more time and money. It is fairly clear that Rossi’s lawyers are following his wishes and opinions, not terribly surprising, as he is paying the bills.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Where to begin? For starters, the License Agreement did not require a steady megawatt.. That is one of the blatant oddities; it only required certain levels of COP, and chemical generation could easily satisfy that (basically almost infinite COP). “Chose to ignore” is blatant speculation. Nobody but Rossi has reported seeing this “elephant.” Apparently, there is witness testimony that the exhaust fans above the back of the warehouse were not operative. If a small pipe was used to convey the steam to a heat exchanger on the second floor, this would surely create back pressure at the claimed flow, thus running into the claimed steady 1 bar pressure and demolishing the significance of the reported “steam” temperature. What actually happened is obscure, with what might have been available as evidence having been destroyed by Rossi. If the reactors actually did generate significant power, Rossi’s paranoid behavior demolished the demonstration.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Abd,

            Talking about the clearly visible in sat photos large exhaust fan over the JM work area, not the vent near the loading doors. Neither Jed, Murray nor Smith acknowledged it was there. In fact it was ignored.

            The hole in the dry wall is the same diameter as the hole in the JM container where the steam pipe enters. Then there are the vibrational rubber marks on the upper story floor plus the clear indication some hose or electrical cable entered the upper story at the North side of the door and the various photos showing windows with glass in them. Adfitionally it can be seen where the black insulation on the outside of the JM container was cut to allow the bypass steam pipe to leave the container and where the 2 x black condensate return hoses connected to the lowest pipe of the serpentine heat exchanger in the JM container.

            All this is clearly visible in the photographic evidence we have. You can either choose to ignore it or analyse it can see it all supports the existence of an upper story heat exchanger.

            I must say that Smith’s conjecture the system did not produce steam but instead circulated warm water is very imaginative and in the same class as Jed’s the flow meter pipe was 1/2 full. Nothing more than a theory with no proof presented to support it. Is this what you expect an expert to include in a report?

          • chemical generation could easily satisfy that (basically almost infinite COP).
            ***Can you clarify here? How can chemical processes generate almost infinite COP?

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Simple. If one is measuring input electrical power, dividing that into output power, a very small amount of heat can release a large amount of heat. Match vs. stick of dynamite. Indeed, a pile of manure sitting there, with oxidation processes keeping it warm for a time. Infinite COP. “Heat after death” in LENR experiments has infinite COP, for a period. COP as s measure of performance makes sense in certain contexts, not on others. Generally, for heating applications, what one wants to know is total heating power, not COP. The GPT implied a megawatt but did not actually require it. The MTBF was not specified. So reactors could continually be replaced. What if those reactors had a chemical fuel in them? (I’m not claiming they did, and I don’t think they did, only that the test specifications were naively written by someone thinking in a narrow way, who made a lot of unstated assumptions.)

            As an example of how COP can be confusing, Parkhomov originally claimed a significant COP. But his reactors kept breaking, failing, Instead of carefully varying the design, he made major changes, making later results not comparable with earlier ones. But the COP seemed about the same. However the actual calculated released heat was declining greatly. He was seeing a smaller and smaller effect, which few noticed because, hey, COP was good. With a smaller effect, “little problems” like the precision of his method measuring evaporation loomed larger. Some of his later work may have improved, but I stopped following his work.

      • CWatters

        I think the fans were quite big. Rossi claimed they moved 50,000 cubic meters an hour or about 14 cubic meters per second through one window.

  • oldrolledgold

    How long do ‘these type’ of trials usually take,please?

    • clovis ray

      I believe that July 25 was the projected end date. It will be hard to determine the actual length.

    • Brent Buckner

      Per Abd’s comment here ( ) the judge said that the trial is expected to end the week of July 24.

  • Andy Kumar

    When the trial is over, we won’t have much to speculate on. I think it will be the right time to have a discussion on anti-intellectualism in America. As a “resident alien” living in America for almost 40 years now, anti-intellectual streak here is quite evident to me. It amazes me that otherwise educated people are willing to ignore ALL the red flags to keep believing in a pipe dream.
    Happy 4th!!

    • cashmemorz

      Spot on!
      This is evident to me from the physics community. When shown facts as to the validity, to the point where universities are giving lectures on a highly disciplined subject such as physic and mathematics, those who should be disciplined sufficiently to acknowledge when things are getting out of hand in the physics community, intellectuals or not, on the point of quantum physics being a gargantuan mistake. This is evidenced by the 50 years plus and 100 billion dollars plus of hot fusion attempts, while a more viable and productive version of physics being available for over 25 years. No, instead of acknowledging their error, in letting quantum physics to continue as if nothing is wrong with it, and not implementing the replacement for QM, those who I have contacted about this point, rebuffed me with statements similar to what I used. I said QM uses curve fitting, so they come back at my argument by using numerology as the basis for the Grand Unified Theory – Classical Physics of Randell Mills. This, instead of showing me what is wrong with GUT-CP they use a simplistic rebuttal. They also use the argument that GUT-CP must live up to the results such as the predictions that QM has made to begin to allow GUT-CP to be compared to QM. The fact that GUT-CP predicts other than what QM predicts is not to be considered. Turf war, simple and open and shut case.

      • Chapman

        You really are a breath of fresh air, Cash!

        I do not believe that I am “anti-physics” simply because I happen to believe we have collectively gone astray following a field-theory fairytale . And I am not suggesting alternatives to QM in one breath, and then talking about Bigfoot, Crop Circles or Mystic Vibrations with the next.

        There was a precise point in time when we went astray. We need to roll back to that point, have a few enlightened conversations with Einstein’s ghost, and then reconstruct what we think we know from that point on. We have learned much in the intervening years, but instead of embracing where those observations lead we have shoehorned raw data and critical observation to force them to support continuing along a fixed intellectual path.

        About the only thing I really get “anti” about is the blind commitment to the academic priesthood’s authority to define allowable thoughts, and to declare blasphemers as heretics. Nothing else can be accomplished until we reclaim academic freedom and the right to independent thought.

        Happy 4th of July, My Friend!!!

    • Chapman

      Right On!!!

      Couldn’t agree more, Andy!

      SO MANY PEOPLE are just absolutely BLIND to the all the red flags and blatant contradictions coming from the AGW community. It is shocking that otherwise educated and seemingly intelligent people could fall for such utter nonsense! To think of all those delicate snowflakes who will be hiding under their beds tonight, shaking, crying “woe is me”, in desperate fear of the approaching global catastrophe being caused by all that carbonation being released as America collectively cracks a beer tonight and toasts the sheer genius of our founding fathers. It is amazing, and makes you wonder what happened to “Intellect” in America anyway…

      Happy 4th!! 🙂

      • Andy Kumar

        What you are saying is text book example of anti-intellectualism : “in a free country like ours, my ignorance is just as good as any expert’s knowledge.”

        • Ciaranjay

          I really don’t want to start a discussion on AGW and this will be my only post on this thread.
          However as we are talking of anti-intellectualism (whatever that means).
          What I find so ironic is the number on this forum who say AGW is false but LENR is real.
          And yet AGW has hundreds of times more evidence to support it than LENR.
          Those who find it is so easy to dismiss the evidence for AGW are in no position to criticize others who dismiss the evidence for LENR.
          Just to make it clear I personally think LENR is real but of course my opinion and beliefs are always subject to change as more is learned.

        • Chapman

          No, it is “anti-blind_elitist_pompous_jerk”. There is a difference, and we must be accurate when discussing such things…

          If one person’s formal training is founded on false models, then his insights may actually be LESS accurate than another who is simply following experimental evidence and is not subject to the tunnel vision imposed by academic group-think indoctrination.

          Evidence and Observation leads one to certain conclusions. If one finds they are having to reject those conclusions in order to conform their intuitive understanding to what one of their professors told them, or because they are afraid of being ostracized by their peers, well… it is the validity of their professor and their peers that they need to be reconsidering, not the hard physical evidence that caused the internal conflict.

          Science means following the facts, and observable evidence, NOT holding faith with a pet theory simply because you invested years studying the idea, and maybe even wrote a thesis on the matter.

          Today’s “Proven Theory” is destined to be tomorrow’s “instructive misconception”. It is the nature of discovery and scientific advancement. Accepting this fact is NOT anti-intellectualism! It is the ultimate act of the intellect embracing the fact that opinion does not shape reality, and that scientific “laws” are nothing more than our attempt to define the natural probable outcomes of events and actions taking place. They are HUMAN constructs, developed to help US understand. Nothing more. And our theories are just as flawed as our mental health.

  • Chapman

    Just a thought…

    I noticed that the IH legal team makes the claim that Rossi committed fraud because “IH only agreed to the test because Rossi falsely represented that there was to be an actual industrial client, and that that client had ties to Johnson Matthey” [paraphrased]

    Well, an astute observer can extract a number of significant facts from this statement:

    1. Let’s just be clear that they openly admit that the Florida run WAS the GPT. They now freely admit that was the intent and purpose of the test. This ends the argument that it was just a product demo, or marketing event, and that they had no idea Rossi was under the impression that it was the contractual GPT.
    Lie number 1 – gone

    2. Notice that they say they only agreed finally because… Well, their initial claim was that Rossi missed the window to initiate the test, and that it was his sole responsibility and prerogative to perform the test and collect the agreed payment, but that Rossi dawdled and failed to perform. They claimed that they had NO involvement or control over the timing, and it was simply Rossi who did not move forward and set up the test. But HERE they admit that they “ONLY AGREED finally”, which clearly means that they previously HAD NOT AGREED!!! And that they had actively blocked such a test from occurring. If they had no control of the scheduling, then their agreement to the test that WAS done would not have been required.
    Lie number 2 – gone

    3. IH states that the unique identity of the reported customer was the selling point that got them to agree to the test EVENTUALLY, yet there is nothing in the contract requiring ANY customer for the test. This means that IH had actively refused to allow the test until some condition that was not specified IN the CONTRACT was met! They absolutely confess here that they refused to honor their own contractual obligations, and stalled and delayed until Rossi presented them with a unique circumstance well beyond those stipulated in the contract. The refusal BY Darden to take action in accordance with the terms of the contract, and to demand additional terms BEYOND the contract, means that they actively FORCED Rossi to seek a way to create an environment with a functioning industrial customer, and Rossi did so to the best of his ability and resources. It was not Rossi who decided that they needed to have a customer after all, but rather DARDEN who would not agree to initiate the GPT until such an arrangement was made. The important thing to note here is that the validity of the client is thus moot, because the client was an IMPROPER DEMAND by IH in the first place. Darden may also have demanded that the walls be painted SKY BLUE, and later discovered that while Rossi sent pictures that LOOKED like the walls were the demanded color, later investigation proved that they were in fact OCEAN BLUE and that Rossi had thus committed fraud. You see? The issue was not part of the CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT! It was just a bit of nonsense that Darden demanded, and held everything up for. It simply is not relevant to the terms of the contract.
    Lie number 3 – gone

    Rossi’s lawyers need to hammer these points hard. The jury is not made up of Engineers. They will not understand, or CARE, about the subtleties of the physics. They will be looking to see who is the victim, and who is the lying and manipulating A-Hole…

    A case like this is not won by irrefutable facts, or subtle legal maneuvers. They are won by planting a sympathetic image in the minds of the jurors. In this case, the image that Rossi’s team needs to fix in the jury’s mind involves Charlie Brown, Lucy, and a football. If they can get the jury to see that IH never intended to pay, and that they strung Rossi along and kept changing the rules, and that they gleefully watched the man spend an entire year of his life, at great risk to his personal heath, sitting in a shipping container trying to meet their demands, only to have them pull some BS at the very end and laugh their butts off at the fool who couldn’t take a hint and read the writing on the wall… well, no evidence or expert witness from IH is going to keep that jury from nailing Darden’s azz to the wall.

    NO ONE likes to be made a chump. And MOST people do not like to see it done to others…

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      Problem with this story. First of all, it depends on the exact meanings of words, and so “paraphrase” doesn’t cut the mustard. I’m not going over this in detail, because I need to get back to reporting Day 3, but: Rossi knew that the time for the GPT had passed, this is completely obvious from uncontested evidence. If not for that knowledge, why even draft the Second Amendment? In addition, he knew that the 2A was “cancelled,” in setting up the move to Doral, nowhere was “test” mentioned.

      Rossi did not follow clear procedures in the Agreement, but invented his own story and procedure directly contrary to the explicit language of the Agreement. No lawyer would ethically advise him to do what he did.

      None of this has to do with whether or not the technology works. It is about business practices, and how sane people conduct themselves when millions of dollars are involved. Anyone who knows business will tell you: If it is important to you, get it in writing, dated and signed. Maybe even notarized.

      Beyond one year, unwritten promises are not worth the paper they are not written on. That is the “statute of frauds,” designed as a legal principle to avoid the kind of meshegas we have seen in this case.

      • Stephen

        It’s not that clear from what we have been able to see so far what was the cause of the delays of the GPT. But I certainly get the impression that: 1. Although it was not part of the original GPT agreement IH for some reason wanted a customer and delayed the test until one was found. 2. There were apparently “delays” with the customer/neighbor of IH that IH originally selected. Eventually AR found a customer in Doral owned by a “Trust” independent of IH using technology owned by that same Trust that “employed” AR to run the day to day activities at the plant. And that effectively allowed the test to be performed and removed the blocking constraints about performing the test. 3. If I understood correctly the amendments were all generated by IH due to changes in splinter/shell company responsibilities. If I understood AEG did not sign the final agreement out of concerns about being paid by IH as a consequence of those changes not out of concerns about the test. None of the delays or amendments were of AR making but all a consequence of “changes” in approach by IH. What ever IH reasons for their approach even if they are totally legitimate reasons which I think could be possible at that time I would think it would be very hard for IH to push the argument that the delays and amendments being of ARs making and that this meant the test was not the GPT.

        FWIW I personally got the impression that all sides were positive about the test at the start of operations even into the first months. It seems to me that things went very wrong with the handling of the IP strategy and this led to a breakdown of trust and subsequent bad actions that enforced that distrust. Even at the end though it seemed to me that AR was open to continuing with IH (F8) but unfortunately the answer was not positive and the payment was not made. At this point the case became about disagreement about factual things IP strategy and fulfillment of contract obligations. I think AR had no choice in the end about taking that to court to resolve or otherwise loosing everything he’d been working for. It originally had nothing to do with who is corrupt or not. Unfortunately it seems that to make arguments for their case or perhaps to establish a counter case out side the original scope of contract and IP some have found it necessary to bringup scenarios involving conspiracy and corruption to divide opinion into two extreems, to distract from the original issues and to put their point of view in a more favorable light. But I would say the real case is still about those original issues contract and IP strategy.

    • DrD

      If only that could all be expressed clearly to the Jury!

    • Engineer48

      Hi Chapman,

      Rossi has stated under oath that he never represented to IH that JM was the parent company of JMP. It is not stated on the Term Paper document and unless IH can present a signed by Rossi document to that statement, it is just worthless near say by the IH lawyers.

      If Rossi had made such representation, it would only take a phone call or 2 by IH to JM to verify the claim. Taken as the IH lawyer words actually occurred, one could ask why IH did not check with JM on the supposed Rossi claim?

      Occam’s Razor says Rossi never made the claim and thus IH never needed to verify the claim.

      Rossi did however purchase certain materials from JM and those materials were processed in the JMP Black container. Just maybe the results of the processing of the JM supplied material might be of interest to JM?

      • Omega Z

        Truth is Darden likely never intended to do the test and pay the $89M.

        Darden manages $2 Billion dollars of investments. He does not have $2 Billion dollars. He collects a management fee. Darden entered the deal with Rossi under false pretense by not having the funds as presented to Rossi.

        Seriously, If Darden had $89 million to pay Rossi, then why was he shopping for investment funds in exchange for shares. He didn’t have $89M as he implied to Rossi when they started this deal. To bad this likely wont be presented to the jury.

  • CWatters

    Just wanted to point out that somewhere in the Rossi depositions he states that IH made some of the ecats used in the GPT. So IH clearly had some involvement in the test.

    • Engineer48

      Hi CW,

      IH manufactured and assembled all the ECat reactors inside the Red container, manufactured, assembled and installed all the individual ECat control computers and the central computer system.

      The Red ECat 1MW reactor container and all the contents are the property of IH.

      Where is there a lack of IP transference from Rossi?

      • frank

        It seems that the magic AR fuel is missing…?

      • Rossi pulled a Fred Flinstone. When Fred lost his job at the quarry, his rock mover Dinosaur stopped working. He had rigged it up so that he was the only one who could get it to work. I doubt the agreement covers the Fred Flinstone clause.

      • Bruce__H

        I think that the “Tigers” were built In Italy by Rossi without IH input weren’t they? I even recall from somewhere that the charges in the Tiger reactors were old ones that had been inserted in Italy before IH was hands-on. It is all the smaller units (that ended up not being used in the 1 year test) that IH constructed.

  • sam
  • Engineer48

    The judges overview of the Rossi vs IH lawsuit, as read to the jury, is an interesting, unbiased, read.

    Highly recommended read.

  • Eric Walker is obviously defending IH the best he can as the LF moderator-at-large. Dewey making wild threats but when answering them you’re out…

    • Stephen

      It’s frustrating I know but I wouldn’t take it too much to heart Sifferkoll.

      I think people need a voice who ever they are even extreme skeptics and pseudo skeptics with an agenda. When the ECatnews website stopped taking posts and eventually closed down they needed somewhere to go. Paradoxically sometimes maybe those people don’t like alternative views and egg a negative response. Maybe they feel threatened that their particular invested view point is under attack or something. Alternatively Sometimes we feel egged on anyway by their views so maybe we do the same to some extent… it’s just human nature.

      In my view that particular thread with its more and more limited participation and its predecessors has become a kind of “Ecatnews extension” thread and like the original ECatnews posts and most people with alternative or more diverse views seem to leave it well alone. Which is maybe a shame but that’s how it goes.

      There are plenty of much more interesting technical threads on the same site. Mostly it is very good I think.

      Do you know when the ECat news stopped taking posts?

      Or if it’s still possible to get the posts from it? I’m curious how comments in that timeline line up with the ECat story as well as changes in views and particular events elsewhere. Certainly it’s important history and for sure many of those views expressed there could give accurate background and historical context and character background for those views behind the current thread in LF.

      • I made a huge analysis of some of the posters there a year ago or so. It was closed down at that time since it became so obvious what was happening and very few seemed to care.

        • Stephen

          Thanks… that was quick. Does this also go back to 2015?

          Edit: interesting context though about “Fred” in light AR’s recently published disposition especially regarding what was behind the Florida Radiation Control inspection episode and AR’s feelings and responses about it.

          • Oh, I don’t have all the ECN posts. Sorry. I read thru MANY them at the time though looking for clues. I think the forum started pretty early 2012 or so. Dont remember exactly.

          • Stephen

            Yeah I guessed so. And I appreciate your investigative style it’s an interesting broad net approach.

            I hope someone has archived it somewhere it will be interesting to look back on some day…

          • Monty

            speaking about something completely different. What do u think about sagan yesterday?

          • Oh. This is really important stuff. 🙂 I like Sagan a lot and thought he was absolutely great the day before yesterday. That said, he was a bit reckless yesterday but it’s extremely hard to judge what is happening at that speed. It was really tight and Cav tried to squeeze thru where there was not space enough. A warning maybe, but DQ . No. That’s not reasonable. I don’t understand why they needed to make an example out of Sag…

          • And impressed by Aru today. Dan Martin was a nice surprise. Froome (and GT as well) a bit disappointing since they had such a superior train, but did not manage to use it better…

          • Monty

            Froome didn’t look as invulnerable as the years before was my impression. But can be he was playing poker like some american a few years ago who is persona non grata now at the TdF 😉

          • Agree. Maybe still got some pain from the crash. Who knows. Long way to go 🙂 Sky has a good team. Kwiatkowski looked strong on his shift.

  • Stephen
    • Bruce__H

      I was afraid of this. It may be the worst possible outcome from the standpoint of the LENR community

    • wpj

      Well, who would have thunk it? Certainly not DW!

      Quark time beckons.

      • MorganMck

        “Quark time beckons.” We can only hope, however Rossi seems to always find a way to delay, obfuscate, or offer less than satisfying evidence/results. I’m not sure why this time should be any different. Rossi told us that the law suit would not slow him down a bit, yet he appears to have made little demonstrable progress during it. I would not hold my breath for some breakout moment now.

  • Engineer48

    Abd’s latest comment:

    “Yes. It was amazing to watch. Zero to settled in about fifteen minutes, not much more. I will now write up the details of what I saw. There is still no official announcement as far as I’m aware, but obvious is obvious, and I have informal confirmation. The final clue: the jury leaving, obviously dismissed. All lawyers smiling broadly, on all sides.”

    No jabs at Rossi. Interesting!

    • I guess Rossi got all his IP and license back. That one is easy. Maybe he got some money too, but certainly not all the $89M. To Rossi though the IP/LA is worth much more than that. They might even have agreed to cooperate to some degree; ie. IH keeping some geographical areas. That could be the best solution LENR wise, maybe.

      • Engineer48

        Hi SifferKoll,

        What happens to IH and their use or not of the Rossi IP will tell the story of what happened.

        • Yes. I’m guessing Rossi wanted to make this deal early but IH still had hopes all the way to gain some unknown momentum, using all means available … But since both parties know all the facts (better than we do) about the actual GPT performance this was probably the only path left for IH to limit their losses. They have probably been negotiating for some time.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Sifferkoll,

            Interesting Weaver, Abd & Jed have not made any jabs at Rossi. Suggests they know more than us and are considering their future positions.

            But time will tell what IH does and if it involves Rossi or his IP.

          • Sure, they know. They might very well have been playing a game. Dewey simply taking off with a “back to the mission” statement … It’s only business. From the position Rossi had when it started with IH being unable to pay and still having the IP – I would say it’s a huge victory for Rossi. HUGE.

          • Engineer48

            Hi SifferKoll,

            Lets hope Rossi can now 100% dedicate himself to the QuarkX and his health fully recovers.

            Did note the Abd comment about Rossi has a nice wig.

          • Yes… I think he had some surgery on his head. Apparently not that healthy to spend one year in a container with tigers… Some radiation perhaps.

          • Omega Z

            Possibly Rossi had a melanoma. I know someone who went through several procedures a couple years ago, but is cured now. This is very treatable when caught early. Balding men should always wear a cap.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Uh, Siffer, IH still has a license, and if they ever had useful IP, they still have it. Rossi’s “huge victory” returned him to where he was without filing the suit, only millions of dollars poorer. Apparently you did not notice, as well, that IH had the ability to pay, they had a commitment for an additional $150 million from Woodford. The $50 million was just an initial tranche, to allow IHHI to diversify.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            I’ll be clear about my position, which has not changed.
            1. Legally, the Rossi suit was massively defective from the start and should have been put out of its misery quickly. Rossi had created enough noise, such as an implied claim that Cherokee was sole owner of IH, that the motion for dismissal failed. The judge wanted to see discovery first. Then when the issues were clear from discovery, the judge actually ignored very similar elements of the motion for summary judgement based on her idea that the parties didn’t agree on anything (which was false, but she didn’t study the motion.) That doesn’t mean that these elements would be ignored at trial. They wouldn’t. The primary Rossi case had very low chance of success. The counter claim was strong in a few elements, but still speculative, not a slam-dunk as to major damages. IH may not have been able to recover on the $10 million and the validation test mishegas, because of estoppel.
            2. A common explanation for Rossi behavior has been that he deliberately makes himself look like a con artist in order to discourage imitation. I was writing in 2011 that there is no clear way to distinguish a fake fraud from a real fraud. The clear evidence (i.e., in Rossi emails) in RvD confirms that Rossi can be deceptive. For a good cause? Maybe. I don’t care about “good cause” or “bad.” Those are judgements that can blind.
            3. I don’t and have never hated Rossi. I thought that the filing of RvD was a tragedy, because Rossi will now find obtaining funding far more difficult, and millions of dollars were now spent on lawyers rather than research. But, hey, he can still play tennis with his beautiful wife.
            4. IH has the License as a hedge. They can now invest in other LENR technologies without fear that Rossi will blow it all out of the water with the Killer Cat. If he does, they will be filthy rich, not that this matters much. In case anyone hasn’t noticed, these people are already wealthy. They make risky investments with an overall positive return. They lose sometimes. It goes with the territory.
            6. I have been assured that IH is not giving up on LENR. The early end of the trial leaves me with some funding I can use to travel to Texas, where the most important current LENR action is. My goal is to improve communication among researchers. Same goal as McKubre, and, in fact, that goal was developed together. Science.
            7. NiH is possible, but not well confirmed by replicable experiment. That may change. However, I do not see IH promoting much NiH work on the near future. Amateurs will continue to play, and playing is how children learn. Great stuff. It is to be encouraged.
            8. PdD is commercially problematic, but my sense is that development of comm’l LENR could take billions of dollars in research, and that won’t happen until the science is nailed, and that isn’t going to happen from wishful thinking. Much more is known about PdD than about other approaches, so it remains important for research. I have a plan, declared it some years back, and have been following it. Little by little, it is working.
            9. If Rossi releases and is selling Quark-X devices or the like, great! I’m just not willing to stake the energy future of humanity on it.
            10. In the pursuit of science, healthy skepticism is essential.

            I want to thank all those who supported my adventure, reporting on the trial, including Frank Acland. There are more adventures coming, for me and for others. Follow, which is becoming set up to accomplish things not easy to do with ordinary Forum formats. One step at a time, and diversity is a high value,

        • Chapman

          Now, you KNOW I am going to repost that Mr. Bean Happy Dance, RIGHT????

          I will hold off until final numbers come in, but things are looking good for Rossi today. Wish I had not set off all my fireworks last night!!!

        • Chapman

          One thing is clear. The settlement conditions are on Rossi’s terms.

          IH was in a BAD position. They only had two directions they could go:

          1. They could continue to claim that Rossi did not perform, but every analysis shows Rossi jumping through every hoop and attempting to meet every demand that IH continued to pile on. They never would have won that argument…

          2. They could have continued to claim that the IP, and the science, was worthless, but that exposed them to fraud issues because of Woodford. Timelines prove they continued to solicit investments beyond the point at which they needed to establish that they had concerns. They were boxed in. Damned if they did, and damned if they didn’t.

          I am sure the settlement allows them to save face, but it was a surrender made with a promise of mercy from the victor…

          I am still surprised that Rossi allowed a settlement, but I suspect there were personal considerations beyond the legal issues. Perhaps his health. Perhaps it is as simple as the fact that he already has his next steps ready, and the issue is just an unneeded distraction, so paying all the lawyers and reclaiming unquestioned control of his IP all he needed to walk away and get on with life.

          Personally, I am disappointed, because IH would have been burned at the stake by the jury… Good theater, that.

          But I am happy for Rossi!

          • Don’t worry. Both IH and Rossi are happy at the moment … They made a win-win deal … and will probably all make money. Losers are the “useful idiots” being used during the process to help IH gain momentum by pushing the counter-claim-conspiracy-theories… If you belong to them. You have been…. (a f-word) … or lets just say … played

          • Chapman


            And the sad part is that I can honestly say that SOME of those individuals seemed like pretty levelheaded fellows BEFORE drinking the IH koolaid.

            Some otherwise decent guys have had their reputations trashed by being willing coggs in the IH FUD machine…

        • clovis ray

          Right if they hadn’t gotten greedy and tried to steal his work they would have still been in the game and if I had to guess the outcome I would say that I/h is no longer in the E-cat business period. We’ll see someone will find out. They both signed nda’s in order to save face.

      • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

        There is a lot of speculation on terms. What came through to me from talking with multiple lawyers and parties, not as anything I can claim is official, is that there were no terms at all, simply an agreement to drop both cases, the original complaint and the counter complaints. This is clear good news for the third-party defendants (who had nothing to gain by going to trial). The appearance to me was that Lukacs, the newest addition to the Rossi team, initiated the negotiation as the jury was about to be brought in. Watching all the attorneys and parties, everyone seemed to be getting happier and happier. Darden was pensive, as I’d expect. He is accustomed to big losses on occasion, risky investments are a specialty. If I’m correct, the settlement means accepting the losses, but he was prepared for that. IPH still has the license. This returned things to status quo ante. If Rossi wants $89 million, he could get AEG to sign off on the second amendment and actually do it right. With no fakery, I.e. No misrepresentations based on what he wants to happen as distinct from, like, Reality.

        Rossi was cordial every time I interacted with him. However, the settlement means that the entire lawsuit was a waste for him, At least a few million, that could be how much more money he’d have if he had not filed.

        My guess is that IH would have accepted this withdrawal from the beginning; after all, they moved for dismissal! They only countersued when they were forced to Answer. Might as well! The counter suit was more difficult than the primary defense, but once one is in court…

        (Rossi has no right to cancel the Agreement unilaterally. He made that up. He would now also be estopped from claiming nonpayment as a reason for cancellation. However, if a real GPT takes place on the future, this would create a new payment obligation. Any new agreement — which a GPT would require — should carefully cover the issues. No more half-assed agreements, I suggest. Pay a little for good attorneys, instead of winging it.)

  • Engineer48

    From LENR Forum:

    PAPERLESS Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga:

    Jury Trial completed on 7/5/2017.
    Case settled.
    Total time in court: 48 minutes.

    Attorney Appearance(s): Francisco J Leon de la Barra, Rodolfo Nunez, Christopher Rebel Jude Pace, Erika Stephanie Handelson, Bernard P. Bell, Christopher Martin Lomax, John William Annesser, II, Brian W. Chaiken, John Charles Lukacs,

    Court Reporter: Stephanie McCarn, 305-523-5518 / [email protected]. (cmz) (Entered: 07/05/2017)

  • BillH

    Rossi V Darden case settled! It’s interesting now how everyone is claiming victory, from my point of view it’s two wasted years by all parties. Very unsatisfactory as we will probably never know what really happened.

    • Chapman

      No argument from me…

      But DO take solace in the thought that the GPT year is what gave Rossi the idle time to think, and then to work on the Quark, and that might not have happened if his energies had been consumed focussing on a rapid deployment of the original model E-Cat.

      In the end, it is probably for the best that the initial fever to take the E-Cat to market was delayed.

  • Engineer48

    A few points to consider.

    I have read the total lawyer fees for both sides were $15m. Abd reported all the lawyers were smiling big smiles, which means they just got paid in full. Does this mean IH paid all the legal fees as Rossi probably does not have $15m?

    Plus does it mean that both legal teams achieved what their respective clients wanted? IH got the IP for the QuarkX and Rossi got his $89m?

    • I’m guessing something along the lines of Rossi getting his IP, all of it – everywhere – since that is what matters most to him. Also guessing they made a win-win deal where IH keeps their markets and the rights to sell quarkx there as well. Maybe IH also paid some money for the GPT etc or only Rossi legal fees.

    • clovis ray

      I think not,89 million is just a drop in the bucket.and I can tell you right now Dr Rossi will never give up his IP, they may take it like last time. His IP is in a very safe place .that only he knows where it is, and as you can see no one has developed a device that produces very much no where close to market it will take year’s , and the quarkx belongs solely to Dr Rossi .

    • toussaint francois