On Dec 29, 2011, at 8:22 AM, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 10:57 PM 12/28/2011, Horace Heffner wrote:
Wow.
Rossi had better hope he doesn't get the same examiner.
(Particularly failure to disclose "best mode" -- which doesn't even
have to be "active concealment").
All the prior art stuff is well done.
A couple of quibbles ... rather fatal to pre-Rossi CF.
Paper 9
Page 16 : absence of "whole body radiation" -- which doesn't seem
to happen in Pd-D
(At least Rossi needs shielding)
Page 19 : "identical testing apparatus" must give "exact result
data" per "settled case law'. -- still too much material-variation
in CF.
(Surely SOME experimental error / equipment variation is allowed? )
I think it means within reasonable error bars, as opposed to
sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't.
Says there is no "reputable evidence of record" supporting CF ...
but leaves the door open with "evidence to indicate appellant has
so succeeded where others have failed".
In short, I think Rossi COULD pass the technical stuff IF he
discloses "best mode".
Yes, if it works as advertised.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
