Jed, Based on the list of patents this reviewer has approved, he appears to specialize in semiconductor physics - not nuclear, or particle physics.
Here are a few quotes for the rejection indicating the reviewer followed established rules in dismissing LENR - "...The Declaration does not provide such evidence as is necessary to render credible low energy nuclear reactions, in particular fusion reactions, given the overwhelming body of experimental data and theoretical arguments against fusion under circumstances well below the Coulomb barrier." "... The finding of lack of utility and enablement may be overcome if an independent committee of peers in the pertinent fields, such as a third peer review by the U.S. Department of Energy, were to conclude that cold fusion or low energy nuclear reactions were shown by the basic research continued after the latest Review by the U.S. Department of Energy (December 1, 2004...) to be reproducible and thus to have utility. Applicant could have his invention tested by such organizations as the U.S. Department of Energy or NIST." The reviewer then goes on to question Godes' electron-capture hypothesis. He could similarly argue that all LENR theories are wrong since all violate conventional beliefs. So, I wonder whether USDE or NIST would agree to test a device unless it worked predictably and uniformly all of time. Probably, Brillouin's claims will not be accepted until they agree to open tests by scientists who are not known believers. -- Lou Pagnucco Jed Rothwell wrote: > Application: > > http://www.google.com.au/patents/US20110122984 > > Final rejection: > > http://coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Godes-US-patent-office-final-rejection-SN-12911586-14-May-121.pdf >
