For example, look at the first indie claim: 1. A reactor device comprising: a sealed vessel defining an interior; a fuel material within the interior of the vessel; and a heating element proximal the vessel, wherein the fuel material comprises a solid including nickel and hydrogen, and further wherein the interior of the sealed vessel is not preloaded with a pressurized gas when in an initial state before activation of the heating element.
I am sure a POSITA could replicate that. On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: > Jones, that's mostly true. It depends on what they're specifically > claiming though. with patents the devil is in the details. > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The USPTO has an 18 month embargo on publication, which is* optional* and >> not required - and they chose not to avail themselves of the delayed >> publication. That is a strategy choice. You can find this stature >> online: (35 U.S.C. 122 Confidential status of applications) >> >> The implication is that they want to get the most basic version of the >> device protected and in front of the public immediately if possible. >> These is a very limited scope patent – and could get through, but it may >> not protect very much. >> >> There is no mention of isotopes or a particular catalyst. This means >> that they cannot protect the use of any catalyst, other than as a trade >> secret, but catch-22 – if the devices is not described well enough so >> that a practitioner “skilled in the art” can make and use it, they are >> in trouble on the basic claim. This is the so-called “enablement >> requirement” of 35 U.S.C. 112. >> >> The purpose of the requirement that the specification describe the >> invention in such terms that one skilled in the art can make and use the >> claimed invention is to ensure that the invention is communicated to the >> interested public in a meaningful way. Thus if MFMP can replicate the device >> for any gain, then Rossi is in a good position. >> >> *From:* Frank Acland >> >> Maybe Industrial Heat is using the USPTO's fast track service for this >> one: *http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Track_One.jsp* >> <http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Track_One.jsp> >> >> … why did this patent show up already? It was only filed in april of >> this year. >> >> >> * Application Number* * Filing Date* * Patent Number* >> >> 61818553 May 2, 2013 >> 61819058 May 3, 2013 >> 61821914 May 10, 2013 >> Ron Kita wrote: >> >> Greetings Vortex-L, >> >> >> *http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=20140326711.PGNR.&OS=DN%2F20140326711&RS=DN%2F20140326711* >> <http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=20140326711.PGNR.&OS=DN%2F20140326711&RS=DN%2F20140326711> >> >> Ad Astra, >> >> Ron Kita, Chiralex >> >> Doylestown PA >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Frank Acland >> Publisher, *E-Cat World* <http://www.e-catworld.com> >> >> > >
