There's nothing in the dispute which hinges on whether the device works,
or not. That point may never be brought up.
Craig
On 06/03/2016 10:04 AM, a.ashfield wrote:
IH has apparently sent Krivit a copy of their legal response to the
court case.
From a quick scan it doesn’t look like they have stated the E-Cat
doesn’t work, but complain about the delay in starting the 1 MWtest,
the instrumentation used and complain about the old E-Cats on stand-by
not being used.Much apparently hinges on the modified agreement for
the test that IH are now saying they didn’t sign.
There are other gems like:
“There is no provision in the Licensing Agreement, however, that
requires Defendants to keep the E-Cat IP confidential or to protect
its purported secrecy.”
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Rossi-vs-Darden/20160602-Darden-et-al-Motion-to-Dismiss.pdf
