The letter that Ms. Kemmler refers to in response to the European patent examiner is interesting reading indeed. It seems to me that Mr. Rossi's intellectual property position is really quite a muddle. I sincerely hope this can be resolved in his favor. Like most on this list, I am hoping Rossi succeeds despite all the strange information that comes from him.
I saw no reference to "best mode" in the letter. I am not sure if European patents have this requirement. The best mode requirement is certainly a part of the U.S. patent system. As I understand it, Mr. Rossi had already made public declaration of the secret catalyst as necessary to successful operation of his invention before his U.S. patent application. He simply must disclose his best method before his patent application can be considered valid. Here is a link to the USPTO about the best mode requirement. It's quite straightforward and easy to understand: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2100_2165.htm http://tinyurl.com/3vhhxex I am personally of the opinion that when a breakthrough of major proportions such as this happens, a special provision should be made for the inventor somehow circumventing all the legal nitpicking that normally accompanies the granting of patents. After all, no one else in this field has made a device capable of generating large amounts of useful energy. Assuming Mr. Rossi is not deceiving us, I think he is entitled to a great deal. M.
