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 nonetheless. Eric