Be careful not to read too much into the USPTO's stamp of "final
rejection".  It is not uncommon to receive this notice during the process
of patent prosecution.  I have issued patents, which, during the course of
prosecution, got stamped "final rejection".  It is time for the patent
attorneys to do their work - to make counterarguments against those of the
examiner.

However, if the Lugano report is being used as the basis of proof of the
patent claims, then the errors in the Lugano report will certainly affect
the patentability of the HotCat.  Some of these errors were directly called
out by the patent examiner.  I believe the Lugano report is capable of
being fixed in revision - at least enough to make the results and
observations all self-consistent.  I also believe the result of the revised
Lugano calculations will still show excess heat - just not as much as
claimed initially in the report.  This revision of the report will be
required quickly if it is to play a role in the patent arguments to
overcome the examiner's objections (a shortened time of reply of 3 months
was given).

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Alan Fletcher <[email protected]> wrote:

> The patent office issued a "final rejection" of Rossi's patent
> application.
>
> https://www.scribd.com/doc/258595858/USPTO-Final-Rejection-Rossi-Patent
>
> I'm not surprised ... he didn't reveal anything of the internal
> structure or "catalysts", and recently added the Legano report as
> evidence.
>
> I classified that as "inconclusive" -- based mainly on the
> emissivity of the ceramic used, and (as for high temperature
> superconductivity) there is no agreed theory for overcoming the
> coulomb barrier.
>
> Though anyone who believes that the free-space coulomb equations
> apply on to a metal/hydrogen matrix, with a sea of electrons
> surrounding it, and the possibility of multi-atom quantum
> conglomerates such as Bose-Einstein condensates, plasmons, phonons
> etc etc ...  is (IMHO) willfully-ignorantly nuts.
>
> The condition of cold fusion is not the same as hot fusion. (rough
> quote).
>
>

Reply via email to