Yesterday, IH filed an Opposition to D.E. 90, the renewed 3rd Party Motion to Dismiss, which had been filed on December 19, 2016.
Summary: Not much is likely to happen here, the arguments to dismiss are weak, unlikely to prevail in an MTD, where all plaintiff allegations that appear to have any factual basis at all will prevent dismissal and require at least discovery and perhaps trial to resolve. Continue reading “Activity on 3rd Party Motion To Dismiss”
A discussion on E-catworld, about the ownership of J.M. Products, brought up Industrial Heat, casting suspicion on their behavior. Continue reading “Questions about Industrial Heat”
As is normal on lenr-forum, “topic” is an excuse to write anything that comes to mind. In the Rossi v. Darden developments thread: Continue reading “Ongoing discussion of Rossi issues on lenr-forum”
A discussion of Rossi’s comments in 2015 about the “test.”
Continue reading “Does Rossi’s “customer” matter?”
The Rossi v. Darden developments thread on Lenr-forum.com has moved into more general discussion of the case. Randombit0, I call Zero, showed up with Planet Rossi arguments. He actually provides, as he has in the past, a hint that he is Rossi, not that it matters much. I’ll come to that.
The usual mishegas is studied and compared with case evidence and, ah, expert opinion.
Continue reading “Planet Rossi or just plain Planet Confusion?”
About the Rossi Motion to File Late confusion, insisted upon by both Annesser (initial Rossi counsel) Chaiken (partner at Annesser’s new firm), a bad sign, and discussion about this on lenr-forum.com.
Continue reading “Better late than never, or better let sleeping dogs lie?”
This post covers information we have on the ownership of J.M. Products, the “customer” for power produced by the “1 MW” Rossi reactor.
Summary: as claimed by Industrial Heat, this was a company created for the “test,” controlled entirely by Johnson, the President of Rossi’s company, Leonardo Corporation. Naughty, naughty!
Continue reading “The owner of JM Products”
Data and documents provided by Industrial Heat to Rossi, per Rossi requests. Sometimes we get what we ask for.
Continue reading “7 terabytes of data and 100K pages of documents in a teapot”
Over three months after a hearing, the transcript becomes available on PACER. This is the first one to appear, and it reveals much about the personalities involved, as well as some of the issues. At the time, there were was much speculation on what was happening. Now we can know.
Continue reading “August 30, 2016 hearing transcript now public”
Today, the 3rd party defendants filed a new Motion to Dismiss. I have not yet reviewed it to compare it with their original motion, however, some of the arguments were familiar to me. I had predicted that the original motion would be denied, but when IH amended their Answer as required, the original MTD was mooted, and the 3rd party defendants had 14 days to refile, i.e., today was the deadline. To review the history:
Continue reading “3rd Party Motion to Dismiss”
This was three days late, but that is now legally moot. (But see Better late than never, or better let sleeping dogs lie?)
I have compiled a merge of the IH Counter-Complaint with the Rossi Answer paragraphs, so that they may easily be seen together, and I added links to exhibit files, again for convenience. This now outlines the counterclaim case.
Those who have been looking for a Wabbit won’t find it here, the Answer is mostly formulaic denial. (But something is described below that is truly remarkable, amazing that Rossi counsel let this by. It’s not a Wabbit but a Toad, as in “I toad you so.”
There are some claims of interest, but almost no specific evidence is indicated. There are no attachments.
Continue reading “Rossi answers the countercomplaint”
This post is being replaced by a Page, more appropriate for a neutral document. The new page is Rossi v. Darden docket and case files.
This is a compilation of most Rossi v. Darden case files, except as noted.
Continue reading “Rossi v. Darden case files”
A post on E-catworld:
Michael W Wolf Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax • 21 hours ago
It is said that a good lawyer could represent either side. What arguments can you give in rossi’s favor. Or are you just an IH hack? If all you can give is pro IH interpretation, then you are not a good lawyer at all. Well, you spend a lot of time here, so….
I’m not a lawyer at all, much less a “good” one. However, I decided to give this a shot.
Continue reading “Argument in Rossi’s favor”
When I engage with a topic, beginning to read about it and comment, researching points, being corrected, and all that, there comes a time where I have a relatively deep knowledge. And then people show up with obviously much less knowledge, but totally certain of their position and contemptuous of others.
This post is about a plea for civility and a defense of Rossi, and my response looks to the roots of belief.
Continue reading “Sympathy for the Inventor”