Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent
It is all about the way it is written, a patent examination based on LENR application alone might or might have been rejected, but by including it in a list alongside more mainstream applications, and concentrating on material processing side they have found a way to get it through without as much difficulty, that is a relatively way to skin the cat, and I believe Celani is doing something similar. The patent examination process is rather arbitrary in most cases (for example vast numbers of ridiculously obvious phone and software patents in last 20 years). On 12 September 2012 21:24, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Jeff Berkowitz wrote: Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example, specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays. Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know what to make of it. Perhaps the P.O. has changed its policy. Maybe not . . . In the past, a few patents such Patterson's got through on a technicality. I do not know what happened here. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent
I will ask David French what he thinks about this patent. - Jed
[Vo]:New Miley Patent
Courtesy of LENR Forum - Follow links at - http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?t=569p=2283 U.S. Patent No. US 8,227,020 July 24, 2012 ABSTRACT: Techniques to form dislocation cores along an interface of a multilayer thin film structure are described. The loading and/or deloading of isotopes of hydrogen are also described in association with core formation. The described techniques can be applied to superconductive structure formation, x-ray and charged particle generation, nuclear reaction processes, and/or inertial confinement targets.
Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent
http://www.google.com/patents?id=WhIgAgAAEBAJpg=PA1lpg=PA1dq=%22Low+Energy+Nuclear+Reaction%22source=blots=Xuf1yRH2vBsig=142QFcoB_2WmhjeCiLVn9AuUGlUhl=ensa=Xei=qEROUKH4JsjSrQHKmIGoBwved=0CD4Q6AEwBQgoback=.gde_4132340_member_161859049#v=onepageqf=false Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example, specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays. Or perhaps the fact that the claims aren't limited to CF/LENR (e.g. also superconductivity, claim 12) was significant? Jeff On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:50 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Courtesy of LENR Forum - Follow links at - http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?t=569p=2283 U.S. Patent No. US 8,227,020 July 24, 2012 ABSTRACT: Techniques to form dislocation cores along an interface of a multilayer thin film structure are described. The loading and/or deloading of isotopes of hydrogen are also described in association with core formation. The described techniques can be applied to superconductive structure formation, x-ray and charged particle generation, nuclear reaction processes, and/or inertial confinement targets.
Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent
Jeff Berkowitz wrote: Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example, specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays. Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know what to make of it. Perhaps the P.O. has changed its policy. Maybe not . . . In the past, a few patents such Patterson's got through on a technicality. I do not know what happened here. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent
This should give Rossi much more confidence to show his invention... if it was not for his totally confusing writing. 2012/9/12 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Jeff Berkowitz wrote: Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example, specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays. Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know what to make of it. Perhaps the P.O. has changed its policy. Maybe not . . . In the past, a few patents such Patterson's got through on a technicality. I do not know what happened here. - Jed -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
