Don’t forget that the Lugano report, containing the fallacious isotope data - 
was apparently submitted directly to the patent office as documentation for 
obtaining the IP. This detail was mentioned in AR’s blog, IIRC. It is probably 
one reason that Rossi got the expedited grant (in addition to age, which now 
allows an expedited process).

That is where the real problem lies. See  “Manual of Patent Examining 
Procedure” Section 2016 on Fraud. This could be a costly problem which has 
repercussions far beyond the original filing. However, the USPTO does not do 
this kind of investigation – it will only come up in a challenge, and must be 
proved by the opposing party – which could be Piantelli. 

Thus us was a STUPID strategy to go to court with Piantelli so early. With 
“discovery” (the legal procedure) the truth about the isotopes could come out 
very soon.

From: Eric Walker 

Bob Higgins wrote:

I don't consider this to be subterfuge on Rossi's behalf.  I don't think he 
ever agreed to full open access to everything from his design.

If that is the case, please remind me never to do business with you!  Trust 
that someone is being straightforward is very important in business.

Based on this, I cannot consider differential isotopic analysis from fuel to 
ash in the Lugano experiment to have any credibility.

I just want to note here that If it were one scientist working with another 
scientist, the lack of credibility of the ash assay would be a huge deal.  
Obviously this is a different situation, but the point is an interesting one 


Reply via email to