Industrial Heat Files Motion to Dismiss Rossi Lawsuit

Thanks to Mats Lewan for posting a newly filed motion to dismiss the case that Andrea Rossi has brought against them. The full document is here:

Here’s the introduction:

The various claims pled in the Complaint all revolve around two central contentions – that IH and IPH were required to pay Leonardo $89 million under a License Agreement and that Defendants were limited in their use of certain information they received from Plaintiffs. Attached to, and incorporated into, the Complaint, however, is the License Agreement. The plain language of that Agreement, coupled with the admissions in the Complaint, demonstrates that Plaintiffs’ central contentions are incurably flawed: The License Agreement required
performance by Plaintiffs within a specific time period, which Plaintiffs acknowledge did not occur within that time period, and the License Agreement permitted IH and IPH – after having paid Plaintiffs over $10 million (which Plaintiffs admit was paid) – virtually unlimited usage of information they received from Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs’ non-contract claims, brought in an effort to bring parties into this litigation beyond IH and IPH, suffer from additional fatal flaws. Plaintiffs’ misconceived fraud claims are simply efforts to recast breach of contract claims as fraud claims, but this is clearly impermissible. They are not predicated on the breach of any duty independent of contract created obligations. The Complaint also fails adequately to allege facts in support of Plaintiffs’ non-contract claims, and further suffers from an impermissible lumping together of Defendants without identifying how each Defendant allegedly committed each claimed infraction. For all of these reasons and the additional reasons set forth below, Defendants respectfully request that the Court dismiss the Complaint in its entirety

The crux of the argument surrounds technicalities.

There is clause in the License agreement which states that IH would pay Leonardo the $89 million payment “contingent upon the Plant operating at the same level (or better) at which Validation was achieved for a period of 350 days (even if not consecutive) within a 400 day period commencing on the date immediately following delivery of the Plant to the Company.”

There was an amendment included in Rossi’s filing which “formally eliminated the requirement that the Guaranteed Performance test period be commenced immediately upon delivery of the plant and instead requiring [sic.] that the Guaranteed Performance Test period would commence on a date agreed to in writing by the parties.” IH says in this motion to dismiss that Ampenergo, one of the parties to the License agreement did not sign that document, making it invalid.

The motion does not address the performance of the E-Cat; it does not discuss the ERV report (which has still not been published), but it does have this comment:

“Because Defendants are not permitted to introduce facts outside the Complaint and its Exhibits, this motion does not address, for example, the numerous errors in Plaintiffs’ purported “Guaranteed Performance Test” that the Complaint purposely ignores (such as departing from the purported test plan, ignoring inoperable reactors, relying on flawed measurements, and using unsuitable measuring devices).”

Further points made by IH in response to Rossi’s Complaint:

“Count I Fails to State a Breach of Contract Claim . . . because the Complaint and its Exhibits demonstrate that Plaintiffs have failed to fulfill their obligation regarding Guaranteed Performance, the fulfillment of which is a condition precedent to IH and IPH’s obligation to pay $89 million under License Agreement

“Count II Fails to State a Breach of Contract Claim . . . because it fails sufficiently to allege specific provisions of the License Agreement that were breached

“Defendants’ statement about their “ownership” of the E-Cat IP is not a breach of the License Agreement . . . Plaintiffs have failed to point to any provision in the License Agreement that forbids IH or IPH merely from stating that they “own” the E-Cat IP. In fact, the License Agreement expressly required that, after IH paid
Leonardo $10 million, “Leonardo and Rossi w[ould] immediately transfer … to the Company [i.e., IH] all E-Cat IP.”

“Listing T. Barker Dameron as a co-inventor in a U.S. Patent Application is not a breach of the License Agreement . . . Plaintiffs have failed to point to any provision in the License Agreement that forbids IH or IPH from listing people as co-inventors on U.S. patent applications. Indeed, the License Agreement contemplates and accepts that such co-inventors might exist in connection with inventions or ideas derived from the E-Cat IP after its transfer to IH”

“Count III Fails to State an Unjust Enrichment Claim.

“Count IV Fails to State a Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Claim . . . By the License Agreement, Plaintiffs permitted IH and IPH to disclose the ECat IP and did not protect its secrecy against IH or IPH’s use or disclosure . . . . Defendants did not use improper means to obtain the E-Cat IP . . . The specific acts alleged by Plaintiffs do not constitute misappropriation.”

“Count V Fails to State a Civil Conspiracy Claim . . .Plaintiffs’ civil conspiracy claim fails as a matter of law because their misappropriation of trade secret claim fails”

“Count VI Fails to State a Fraud and Deceit Claim . . . Plaintiffs’ fraud claim fails because it does not allege any tortious conduct by Defendants independent of the conduct that serves as the basis for the alleged breaches of the License Agreement.”

“Count VII Fails to State a Constructive and Equitable Fraud Claim . . . Count VII fails to state a claim for constructive and equitable fraud because Plaintiffs have not alleged any facts demonstrating that Defendants owed Plaintiffs a fiduciary duty”

“Count VIII Fails to State a Patent Infringement Claim . . . Contrary to Plaintiffs’ belief, filing a patent application is not an act of patent infringement.”

” IX. Plaintiffs Impermissibly Lump Defendants Together in Several Counts . . . Plaintiffs are not permitted, particularly with respect to their fraud claims, to merely lump together all of the defendants in their allegations.”

  • jrainearwills

    Well, the motion seems sufficiently reasonable. It makes me wonder if Rossi is representing himself in the lawsuit. Otherwise, perhaps IH’s legal team would not have effortlessly picked apart his claims, as they have.

  • Engineer48

    Hi All,

    Why if as Weaver claims, IH never measured any excess heat, would they build the HotCat Dog Bone reactors & ship them to Lugano, then build 2 x 1MW reactors and ship them to Miami, if they knew before they did not work?

    For IH to ship reactors they claim they knew did not work, to external to IH tester who would publicly publish the test data, is simply not believable by anybody.

    No business works like this, shipping their manufactured products, that they claim do not work, into public trials.

    I suggest any jury hearing of these actions would very quickly stop believing anything IH says.

  • cashmemorz

    What Industrial heat and their boys are all about is taking IP for themselves at whatever cost it may be to the actual inventor. Its just business. This is aptly shown in the way Trump does business. Basically not paying for work done.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Cash,

      Well as Weaver has shared, IH is no longer doing any work with Rossi’s IP, which is correct as Rossi terminated their rights to do so.

      That he claims it doesn’t work and that Brillouin’s does is just talking down a now competitor and taking up the investment they made in Brillouin.

      • cashmemorz

        What gets to me, in a psychic way, is that this is how successful business can work to the detriment of society. As the Trump example goes so far as to get this Trump guy, I can’t call him a person, he got so far as to get nominated as Republican main candidate for pres of the states. Unbelievable! This is how so many in the world measure success.

  • Engineer48

    Interesting photo which should clear up how the returned water & steam from the heat exchanger is turned in condensate that has very little steam in it.

    Basically the fluid return from the heat exchange is run into a vat of water at room temperature, which removes the higher heat from the steam and turns into back into water. Then the reactor input pumps suck up that condensed water to feed it back into the reactor as steam less water. With this system, which is the standard way to handle the returned fluid from the heat exchanger, there is no way anyone could feed steam from the customer’s site to create a false COP. People who suggest this just maybe have never visited a steam boiler that has a condenser for the returned fluid.

    I’m very sure the ERV measured the reactor input fluid temperature and if it was below 100C, well there can not be any significant steam content as the lower temp fluid will absorb the higher steam temp energy and turn it into water.

    Also interesting to see who was testing the original Leonardo Hot Cat before IH designed their DogBone version that they submitted to the Lugano team to test. Is that Darden and Vaughn I see?

  • Engineer48

    My opinion, for what it is worth on the release of the ERV report by either party;

    Will not release until he can see the whites of their eyes as then IH will have very little time or room to move to avoid his data blast. Rossi knows how to engage the enemy and win.

    Will not release the full ERV data as then folks like me and other engineers can tell the ERV COP calcs are correct, which will destroy the IH case. If IH release altered or Cherry picked data, then Rossi will counter with their data does not match the ERV data and they will be toast.

    What we have seen so far from Weaver is initially released data that was not representative (ie 100.1 steam temp and not understanding that 0.0 barG means sea level atmospheric pressure and talking about the reactor containers failing at 2 PSI, which should never happen inside a water boiling container unless you sealed the boiler and let the boiling water cool down to ambient, which is not how a boiler works.) and then only partial data that has been Cherry picked.

    Jed, who also claims to have some data, will not reveal. From my readings he has never stated he has ERV data but said he has seen other IH data. On the Jed statement, please correct me if I got that wrong.

  • Engineer48



    Motions to dismiss can be big winners or big losers. Filing a motion to dismiss in virtually every case is a bad habit, but probably not as bad as the habit of never making one. Generally, a motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the claims asserted in the complaint. Failure to state a claim is often raised as a sort of a defense to a plaintiff’s complaint. A defendant may move to dismiss a cause of action if the plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

    To sum up, to win a motion to dismiss, the defendant must now show that the plaintiff did not plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible” on its face. Though there are still differences of opinion about construing Iqbal, as such, Iqbal brings clarity for addressing both pleading standards and the standards for a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in all civil cases in federal court.


    • Hi all

      Hence why Rossi ended the IH license. For IH’s motion to dismiss to hold water IH inherently have to accept that IH no longer have any rights to either the manufacture or sale of E-Cat’s in the US, Russia, China, the Arab states etc and Rossi is now Free to license anyone else or to make E-Cat products himself.

      If they try to claim the contract still subsists their motion to dismiss fails.

      Rossi has them neatly skewered on the horns of the Dilemma.

      Kind Regards Walker

  • Engineer48

    Peter Gluck has just disclosed, on his blog / newsletter, some very interesting new statement from Rossi. Well worth the read:

  • Hi all

    4 More days before IH must give a formal answer. A motion to dismiss does not stop the clock.

    Kind Regards walker

    • Engineer48


      From my reading of clause 5, attached, it is ONLY IH that can grant an extension of time to the Validation period.

      As IH signed the 2nd contract amendment, granting the time extension, it would seem the existence or not of the other 2 contract signatories on the amendment should have no bearing that IH did agree to the extension.

      Also by IH’s actions, they showed that they had granted the time extension.

      Just maybe the IH lawyers are hoping the judge does not read clause 5?

    • SD

      Dewey Weaver claims the opposite: “June 12 went away with the MTD.”

      • Engineer48

        Weaver often “Gets” things wrong.

        Like not understanding 0.0 barG is really 14.7 PSI and that you do not pressure test a steam boiler by reducing the internal air pressure from 14.7 PSI down to 2 PSI. Steam boilers cause water to boil, turn into wet, then dry / superheated steam and EXPAND 1,700 times the dry steam volume versus the liquid volume.

        • SD

          I agree, but wouldn’t he know if the folks at IH were scrambling to get a response within the next 3 days?

          • Engineer48

            With Weaver who knows?

            I have started archiving everything he posts. Who knows what fun that may bring in the future?

            What is that old saying about giving someone enough rope to H##G themselves?

    • Gerald

      what does this line in the case bucket mean?
      MOTION TO DISMISS1 Complaint: Latest line –

      Responses due by 6/20/2016 (Lomax, Christopher)

      Is it the IH attorney gets an answer on 20 june on the motion of dismiss? And so the date 12 june still stands for the formal answer of Darden and IH?

      I also see that by 30 june, the judge must have time schedules an certificates?

      A little hard to follow, maybe a siple timeline with key dates would help some.

  • Engineer48
    • Engineer48

      Domain registration info attached.

    • SD

      You probably don’t need a website to use a domain as an e-mail address.

      That domain initially linked to their press release btw

      • Engineer48


        Understand that. What I saw was the blogger called Weaver revealed an IH email address to give his identify some credibility.

        • Gerald

          First I thought it was a typematch the .co extention. But it real. There’s also a mail domain for it.

          What I found interresting, is registrered in 2000 and the .co and .org are registrered on 7-feb-2013.

          So in that period they where going to use and protect their .com domain I Think. It probably dates just before the 24 hour validation test?

          Quit anoying the use of .com and .co Probably just good for godaddy’s pocket. 😉

          • Engineer48

            Hi Gerald,

            Sure hope their email server has a massive spam filter and good bandwidth, cause Weaver just opened himself and that server up to LOTS of massive junk emails.

            • Gerald

              Its hosted at google, i quess thats no problem for them. Must be atronomical how much junk mail their server must handle.

  • DrD

    Is this reasoning flawed:
    IH claim the contract was not fulfilled.
    Therefore, they do not owe the oustanding $89M.
    Therefore, not having completed the purchase contract they no longer have rights to use the ip and license.
    The failure was probably at the door of IH but all that matters is that it wasn’t completed for what ever reason, even including the other accusations that IH have touched on.

    Also as Engineer48 pointed out, they may even be excluded from competing in the LENR field.
    Is that flawed?

    • Engineer48


      The contract specifies a proportional payout which if the COP = 6.0 IH pays the full $89m, with proportional payout between > 2.6 & = 6.0 and IH owe Rossi the full $89m.

      Please note that in the IH Motion To Dismiss, IH are claiming $100m damages. So they too have stepped it up.

      • DrD

        Yes but IH claim the contract wasn’t fulfilled because the amendment wasn’t valid and therefore the test wasn’t completed in the defined time period. If so, the COP isn’t relevant.
        Therefore, I suggest that the contract wasn’t fullfilled. IH owe Rossi nothing (maybe?) but more importantly to AR, IH don’t own the IP. (maybe?) since the contract wasn’t completed.
        If this interpretation is correct (I’m not convinced it is) then i think it’s in Rossi’s favour except he loses a mere $89M.

        • Engineer48


          As I read clause 5, attached, IH and only IH can extend the period of the Validation as they did in signing the 2nd amendment to the contract.

          Any other signatures on or missing on the 2nd amendment mean nothing as only the IH signature has effect (has the power) as per clause 5 to extent the Validation period.

          As a Bush Lawyer, it seems the IH legal eagles are on a fishing trip to see what they might catch and hoping the judge does not read clause 5.

          • DrD

            I have to say, that’s also how I interpret it.
            I’m just trying to imagine what’s the consequence of IH’s “counter” being accepted (contract not fulfilled). Do they lose the license? In which case it’s an own goal IMO.
            I think AR isn’t worried about the 89M so much as IH controling the market.

  • Engineer48

    The opening statement of Clause 1 is interesting as it implies ALL the terms and conditions of the license must be continually met or someone is in default.

    If IH believed they only needed to meet the payment requirements of clause 3.2a and 3.2b but could ignore clause 3.2c, then they are in default of clause 1 and of clause 3.1 and thus they have no rights to either the IP nor the territories despite the $11.5m payment.

  • Hi all

    It appears IH’s motion to dismiss has failed:

    Kind Regards walker

    • pg

      How do you know?

      • Hi all

        In reply to pg

        Read the post below this and follow the link.

        The judge is gathering information and expertise on the issues and readying for trial.

        Kind Regards walker

        • Andrew

          I read the article and while it does sound like LeoCorps prospects are good but the article is opinion based on facts and nothing is set in stone.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            I hope that the article hits the point and it has its own basis.

            I would be glad if that happens. Because I truly believe that IH is trying to steal Rossi’s IP.

            Sometimes justice doesnt deserve that name but I hope it does in that case.

            It would be unfair to get a result where we see – Hey, I dismiss your case, you lose 89M because the contract reffers to Rosi not to Rossi (that is a simplified example)

            Most of what IH claimed is not supported in the fact that they allowed the test until the end without saying anything.
            At least here at Spain, there is a rule, formal verbal contracts and agreements are valid, the problem with these is to get the proof that they were really made.

            The fact that IH built the plant, waited until the test ended and now with the ERV report wich shows a COP of 50 and wich makes them pay 89M they go back to some things that they sould have claimed before.
            So, the lack of objections before should be taken as no objections in these matters, they should have raised the complaint about these before and not now.
            And the judge should then take the test as a proof of the agreement between IH and Rossi, and at this point, the only thing wich matters is the ERV report unless they claim fraud.
            And trust me when i tell you that if IH didnt make any mention against the ERV report was because there was nothing to argue about it.

            The – unoperative reactors – doesnt matter as it doesnt affect to the final COP, in fact if these reactors were operative when they werent the final COP would have been better.

            The – unsuitable methods – is a lie, but they should have raised an objection to these before or during the test, not after it. They built it.

            So, I hope that the judge crushes IH due to their bad behaviour. And the last developments of IH and Cherokee the last months shows a big bad faith on their side.

            • These counter claims were thrown in as an aside – basically just to muddy the water They are weak and largely irrelevant.

              If that is representative of the defense Jones Day will be putting forward, I’d want my money back. Not that it’s too likely that IH is actually footing that particular bill.

  • Engineer48

    Interesting read:

    IH actions may have exposed their agenda.

    • Very interesting analysis, well worth reading despite the sometimes rather mangled English, as are the various other posts linked out of the document. One of the latter makes a good case for this affair being far larger than has been assumed to date, and suggests that it may well involve large scale conspiracy to suppress, delay or usurp e-cat technology.

      • georgehants

        Morning Peter, it would seem that any conspiracy begins and ends with Mr. Rossi unless he is being forced by some authority to act the way he has.
        He has for over five years now totally refused to share details of even the most basic repeatable Cold Fusion, for a religious man he must have great faith that his god is a practicing capitalist and the welfare of the World is of little worth or consideration.

        • Engineer48


          Rossi is a Capitalists, that has been taught the hard way the only way he will see his dreams delivered is by tightly protecting his IP. We can see the effect when he openly shared his IP with IH.

          It is his ball and he can play the game the way he chooses.

          Besides as I have told you many times, it is corrupt politicians and business people that cause the suffering in the 3rd world. LENR reactors will not help that situation and will probably just make the corrupt politicians and business people very rich as LENR reactors deliver into their hands are a very powerful tool to gain even more control over their countries cash flow via tight control of the energy availability.

          • georgehants

            Engineer, thank you, you are confirming just what I say, corruption everywhere, what do you suggest in this democracy that we do to end this sad state of affairs.
            You say —— “Besides as I have told you many times, it is corrupt politicians and business people that cause the suffering in the 3rd world.”
            A strange way of giving your opinion that is incorrect in that it is everyone of us that allows those ” politicians and business people” to continue in their corruption.
            They could not take unfair advantage if the people did not blindly or with awareness allow it.
            As I clearly state above, my opinion is that Mr. Rossi personally is wrong to withhold information that then harms others.
            Change must start somewhere and it is no excuse to just say that is the way things are or we would still have black slaves and colour prejudice etc. etc.

            • Engineer48


              Rossi’s IP will destroy the investment portfolios of a lot of very wealthy individuals and destroy the share value of a lot of very large worldwide energy controlling companies. You think they will do nothing as all the money & power, their money and position earned?

              They will not go silently into their graves.

              • georgehants

                Engineer, it seems that we both wish to see a more equal and fair World.

                • Engineer48

                  Maybe ask yourself why Rossi is building a QuarkX reactor plant in Sweden?

                  How does the Swedish gov view personal rights? Do you think the Swedish view of the rights of the individual and of the responsibility of gov/business might just extend to Rossi’s new partner/customer, which just might have asked Rossi to build his factory in their home country?

                  I believe Rossi thought he had found a match to his desires to help others when he aligned with IH but then learned to his dismay that what he was sold was not the reality he sought.

                • georgehants

                  Engineer, yes I understand all of your points, congratulations to Switzerland for having a referendum on a minimum wage, truly Wonderful that their authorities allow such true democracy.
                  Such a shame that the population voted against it, but at least the politicians etc. fairly tried.
                  We differ in that I believe it is up to everyone of us to make our own decisions, in America the people have a free choice of the kind of government they want and we are seeing the choice that they are making.
                  Mr. Rossi has a choice of releasing the method and let the World freely improve and work on his Wonderful discoveries or keep the secrets for personal profits, we can only agree or disagree if that is right or wrong and I can only give you my personal opinion that it is wrong.
                  Nothing is forcing Mr. Rossi to choose his path (that we know of) besides his own personal choice.
                  That is his right as a free human being.

                • Engineer48

                  To do what is needed, Rossi need a friendly and supportive government, legislature and business community.

                  The coming QuarkX rollout will almost totally reshape the political landscape of the planet, destroying trillions of dollars of fossil assets, opening up trillions of new doors to make trillions of dollars for the global company and government behind the rollout. Imagine Sweden having a multi trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund in say 10 years? You think just maybe the Swedish gov can see value in Rossi building his plant in Sweden and aligning with a Swedish global power industry manufacturer?

                  That company just may need the support of their home country government and for the manufacturing plant to be located in the country of their home base and main political influence. Why? Both physical and political defense walls.

                  There is a war coming as those who stand to lose trillions will not go easily into their graves.

                • georgehants

                  Engineer, many thanks for good chat, I think we are both looking forward to the positive benefits that will hopefully, eventually come from Cold Fusion.

                • Unfortunately Sweden is too closely aligned with the US for comfort. The Assange affair indicates that (like the UK and France) their government will do what it’s told by Washington.

                  I would have thought that Germany was the better bet, as they desperately need to fill the energy vacuum left by closing down their nuclear power stations. Germany is also bigger and much more powerful than Sweden, and so in a better position to tell the US to bog off if they try to intervene.

                • Engineer48

                  One could suggest Assange was not worth a fight with the US over but a Trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund just might be considered as something worth doing it their way.

                  BTW ABB is a hybrid Swedish & Swiss company:

                  ABB is the product of many acquisitions and mergers, but primarily the 1988 coming together of ASEA of Sweden and Switzerland’s BBC, formerly known as Brown Boveri, two of the proudest and best known names in European electrical engineering history. In subsequent years, the combined business, which once included products as diverse as turbines and railway engines, was streamlined to focus on today’s priorities of power and automation.

                  Each country has a strong history of independence and neither country likes being told what to do.

                • Mats002

                  Yes and ABB have a nuclear division as well. They have any kind of skill needed to take on LENR. 135 000 employees worldwide.

                  Not a company you can mess with easily.

                • Observer

                  Rossi wishes to become a multi-national corporation, with each foot in a different jurisdiction. His past exploits in starting businesses reinforces this strategy.

                  There is currently a power struggle going on between Nation States and Multi National Corporations. (Think Europe vs. Google, etc.) We assume the Nation States are more powerful than the corporations, but are they? It is only a matter of time before corporations declare sovereignty (independent authority and the right to govern itself) and demand that all interactions between them and Nation States be established by treaty (with, and signed by them).

                • Looking from the outside it seems to many observers that the US is already a corporatocracy, run by the multinationals for the multinationals, and representing their interests abroad. The coming TTIP ‘trade deal’ is adequate indication that corporations can always find many traitors in nation states (or in this case, the EU) who will sell them out from within.

                • kdk

                  Yes, also, Greece is in the middle of a fascist feeding frenzy. That’s their plan for all States, if they could.

                • Pweet

                  Regarding “Rossi needs a friendly and supportive government, legislature and business community.”
                  For the last two or three years Mr Rossi has said that exists in the USA. He has worked there before over many years now, so that opinion must have been formed on the basis of personal experience.

                • Pweet

                  When I ask myself “why Rossi is building a QuarkX reactor plant in Sweden?” I hear myself replying it’s probably because it is one of the few places he hasn’t previously announced he was building a robotized reactor plant already.
                  Why on earth should I take this latest proclamation as being any more significant. Why should I have even a little bit of confidence that something might come of this when the company which might have been able to finance this has just backed out of the door?

                  Furthermore, I believe it has always been, and still is essential that an ecat of any form not get out into the open marketplace where it can be truly independently tested and reported on. So it is absolutely certain that if a factory is set up anywhere, including Sweden, it will not be producing an ecat, in the same way that no ecat has reached the open market from any USA factory. And that’s very strange since it is known that at least one licensee has tried to buy one and failed.
                  Is there any reliable evidence at all that this is set to change? If there is then please tell me.
                  Just for future reference, I confidently predict there will not be a factory set up in Sweden producing ecats.

              • Pweet

                At this point I really don’t think any ‘wealthy individuals’ or ‘worldwide energy controlling companies’ see anything Mr Rossi has done so far as being in any way disruptive to whatever industry they might be in.
                Had Rossi made even one incontestable demonstration proving the capabilities of the ecat, that would be different but he has not.
                In five years he has not! When simple faults which would be so easy to rectify in a repeat test were pointed out it was always claimed they were not necessary because he knows the ecat works, he says. Well he might but the so called worldwide energy controlling companies do not, and they will certainly not be convinced by the word of Mr Rossi. If they did, they would be beating a path to his door to buy into it, and clearly they are not. He has had to coax the involvement of some hapless venture capitalist to finance his work and he has not even been able to ho;d their interest.
                After allegedly heating his factory for some years with his ecat, and claiming and advertising he had ‘products ready for market’ and yet not actually selling any, the worldwide energy controlling companies would by now be regarding any claims of his as a joke. ‘Worldwide energy controlling companies’ did not get to be worldwide or energy controlling by jumping at shadows. They react to real events in the real world, and so far the ecat only exists in the world of hope, wishful thinking and conjecture.
                Now, while corrupt politicians and business people might not be contributing as much as they could to alleviate conditions in third world countries, so far Mr Rossi has contributed even less. And that’s pretty shameful considering that if he has what he claims he could have made some big inroads into giving third world societies cheap heat, light and electricity, and that would be a lot for people who have to cook their food over fires fueled by sticks and dried camel dung. But, he chooses to give them nothing and has made that choice daily for five years now.
                I would ease up on “corrupt politicians and business people that cause the suffering in the 3rd world” until such time as they are lagging significantly behind Mr Rossi in providing assistance, because so far they are streets ahead.

                • your posts are very unconvincing and you seem quite frustrated.

        • kdk

          And again, you know the sorts of tons of bricks these people drop on others who try to get things out into the open about all sorts of things from chemtrails, 9/11, all the false flags, and especially if you have good evidence. They wouldn’t blink an eyelash after killing tons and tons of people to scoop up the patent for themselves, and sue the pants off, literally, of anyone getting in the way of them making money from their more lucrative, to a simple mind, oil schemes. Unless somebody passionate about getting the technology out there has the patent it will sit and rot or be abused like so many other patents.

          Thank God Rossi isn’t stupid enough to give away his secret to them, and expect it will somehow turn out different than the storm of garbage we are subjected to every single day for decades now.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Ah yes, all Rossi has to do is reveal his secrets.
          Then the blackmailable pedophiles in office will come out in droves to support it, the United Nation’s diplomats will give up all their
          hookers and blow to promote it, rock stars will have fundraisers (and pocket 99% of the money) and we’ll all live happily ever after.

    • Gerard McEk

      Yes, I read it also, found it via EgoOut. In the same blog Abd-ul Rahman Lomax gives a totally different view. See: Saturday 4. We will see where it ends.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Padua Cell – did we bake a cake?

    The very first 100% Parkhomov supplied fuel reactor the MFMP ran was the Padua cell. It was heated 2 times, once in Padua, Italy and again at me356’s place. In total, it ran for far more than 1 week live and for a large proportion of that, over 1000C.

    Whilst there were signs that the “active” side ran hotter than the null side, the point of the experiment was to cook the ingredients with a view to seeing if there might be any transmutations and if there were, would they be in line with Rossi’s or Parkhomov’s related claims.

    The first 3rd party analysis of the ash in its raw form is here:

    For more details and to discuss the data or put forward questions to be presented to the testing party, please visit our main blog here:

    • roseland67

      Was kinda hoping that the isotope mass changes would be more blatant.
      Appears to my untrained eye that some of the
      Ni58 > Ni61,
      But not enough to be out of the tolerance limits?

      • Bob Greenyer

        The analysis points in the direction claimed by others ( skew to 62Ni and disappearance of 64ni ) – but if true, we’d either have to have a VERY long run or be successful with stimulating a faster burn rate to see something unequivocal.

        For me, the more interesting stuff could be buried in the rest of the data – which is why we have asked for the raw data. It appears that the other elements present may be in line with claims and expectations (assuming effect real).

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Ah yes, the oscillations of the symmetrical infrared stretching of nickel-64 hydride’s bonds, H~Ni(64)~H causes the protons to tunnel and fuse with the nickel-64, Ni(64) to become zinc-66 in an excited state, Zn(66)* which in turn fissions into nickel-62, Ni(62) and an alpha, He(4).

          H~Ni(64)~H > Zn(66)* > Ni(62) + He(4)

          11.8 MeV

          See my comments here:

          • Alan DeAngelis
          • Gerard McEk

            Why would 66Zn fission into 62Ni + 4He? It is stable.

            • Alan DeAngelis

              Yeah Gerard but it would not be in its stable ground state. That 11.8 MeV has to be released.

  • GiveADogABone

    Back to the MTD and LA.

    1: … the License Agreement permitted IH and IPH – after having paid Plaintiffs over $10 million (which Plaintiffs admit was paid) …
    [Fine. The money was paid in accordance with the LA and everybody agrees about that.]

    2: … during a 24 hour test period the Plant consistently produces energy that is at least six times greater than the energy consumed by the Plant
    [Why would IH pay $10million if this CoP of 6 or better was not achieved?]

    3: the ERV will measure the flow of the heated fluid and the Delta T between the temperature of the fluid before and after the E-CAT reaction.
    [The ‘six times’ in 2: depends on these measurements in 3:. If the measurements for 24 hours and the first ERV report were good enough to pay $10million, then why were they not OK for 350 days?]

    It seems to me that the payment of $10million under the LA is strong evidence that IH were satisfied at the time that a CoP of ‘at least six’ was achieved as measured by flowmeter and thermocouples A CoP of six then becomes the target for the subsequent GPT, having already been achieved in the 24 hour test.

    What evidence would IH have that a CoP of less than six was achieved over the 350 days in accordance with the contract?
    None at all is the most likely answer. Everything points the other way.
    What is left for IH to cling to?
    Totally discredit the 350 day test procedure and blame that failure on Rossi alone. Note that there are two elements to that last sentence.

    Now read footnote 1 of the MTD ( very slowly and carefully ) :-
    Because Defendants are not permitted to introduce facts outside the Complaint and its Exhibits, this motion does not address, for example, the numerous errors in Plaintiffs’ purported
    … [even that page break is carefully placed]
    “Guaranteed Performance Test” that the Complaint purposely ignores (such as departing from the purported test plan, ignoring inoperable reactors, relying on flawed measurements, and using unsuitable measuring devices)

    and extract :-
    the numerous errors in Plaintiffs’ purported

    “Guaranteed Performance Test” that the Complaint purposely ignores

    What do you see?
    I see an attempt to start to totally discredit the test procedure and blame that failure on Rossi alone. The MTD is simply a ruse (28 pages of legal whitewash) to introduce footnote 1 as discreetly as possible. The 12 June reply filing should be read in this light. The core issue is now highlighted and most of it must be about engineering argument and test data. It could also be noted that pinning the blame for the failure on Rossi enables IH to say to their investors that IH were blameless; all fraud issues for investors are hereby passed to Rossi.

  • builditnow

    Smells of an attempt to suppress LENR / Cold Fusion. The problem with the arguments presented is that experiments in the 10s of 1000s or likely much greater have failed to produce the claimed mini nuke explosion, ever. Rather, it’s been really difficult to get LENR effects to occur, generally at very small amount of power.
    The worst that has happened is the metal melts and the reaction cannot continue with molten metal.
    Scare tactics?

  • Alan DeAngelis

    If it is true, there would be no need for a Nobel Prize. The E-Cat would be its own prize.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hi Guys, tomorrow, the MFMP will be asking if we baked a cake in Padua as the first independent TOF-SIMS analysis of the Padua cell ash (very first independent 100% Parkhomov fuel test) is in – and it is interesting.

  • Bear1145

    I am a Rossi believer, I have also followed this for 4 years. I would like the option’s of those of you to the following questions. Donald Rumsfeld stated , there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know. What this means as to how this relates to the e- Cat -Known unknowns result from phenomena which are recognized, but poorly understood. On the other hand, unknown unknowns are phenomena which cannot be expected because there has been no prior experience or theoretical basis for expecting the phenomena. This is a common issue in NASA and within the computer industry. Unknown unknowns are risks that “come from situations that are so out of this world that they never occur to you. For example, prior to the invention of the personal computer, manufacturers of typewriters probably didn’t foresee the risks to their business.” The terms “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns” are current in project management circles. Known unknowns refers to “risks you are aware of, such as cancelled flights.

    1. Is the this the cause of IH behavior, the known knowns–E- Cat is real.

    2. The known unknown is why did they not pay Rossi ,why did they continue to file IP’s and why did they solicit money and business on the e-cat?

    3. IH’s unknown unknown is did it not cross their minds before their contract with Rossi that the e-cat would over night totally devalue the other green environment holding?

    4. Could it also come down for us and IH what we know, what we do not know, what we cannot know, but what we do not like to know?

    • I have little time for Rumsfeld as a man but I’ve always felt that he was unjustifiably derided for the interesting and actually quite profound analysis you quote. To an extent of course the question of known/unknown depends on who exactly it refers to – something can be known to a small ‘insider’ group that is unknown the world at large – and this is very much the case for the e-cat story.

      We’ve recently seen a bit more of what lies behind the curtain than has been usual, but in terms of who is involved I suspect that there are still at least 50% ‘known unknowns’ (to us outsiders) yet to be revealed, and a possibility at least of a few ‘unknown unknowns’ (to everyone) in the science of cold fusion that will require some fundamental paradigm shifts in many areas.

  • Barbierir

    according to Mats Lewan he doesn’t work for either any longer

  • Barbierir

    on may 28, the same photo twice, the second one cropped on the sides

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • Pekka Janhunen

    Probably just lots of misunderstandings there. To get a realistic, physics-based introduction to nuclear explosives, I recommend Carey Sublette’s “NWFAQ”. Digesting that, one probably understands why mini-nukes are unlikely to exist in the real world. By mini-nuke I mean very small critical mass, not just an inefficient explosion where most of the material fails to react.

    Given nuclear material, it’s easy to get a chain reaction which emits dangerous amounts of radiation, but does not really explode. In Los Alamos, such early experiment was called “tickling the dragon’s tail”, they dropped a uranium cylinder through a hole made in another uranium piece or something like that. While in the hole, critical mass was briefly exceeded and the cylinder became warm by the chain reaction. However, to get a real nuclear explosion is much harder and is all about speed: how to compress the mass into criticality very quickly. If one does it even slightly wrong, one just gets a dirty bomb whose explosive power does not much, if at all, exceed a chemical explosive of the same size.

    The speed of the neutron-mediated chain reaction depends strongly on the density of the fissile material. When the chain reaction has started to produce energy, the material heats up which causes thermal expansion or melting and evaporation which tends to stop the chain reaction. The bomb has to be massive enough for two reasons: 1) to prevent too many neutrons from escaping, to reach criticality in the first place, 2) to have enough inertia to prevent the thing from expanding too quickly. This is, in a nutshell, why making mini-nukes is hard and probably impossible.

    If one replaces neutron-mediated chain reactions by something else (I mean something currently unknown that happens in CF), that something else had better not be slower than neutrons or else the chain reaction grows too slowly in comparison to how quickly the mass disintegrates during the explosion. For example if the mediators are ionised nuclei themselves, they move through matter only at the speed of a thermal shock i.e. the same speed at which the mass is already expanding.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Thank you, Kim. Chris Busby talks about this in another
    disturbing video.

  • Ged

    Haven’t seen you in ages, Kim! That’s an interesting take on matters, though I think the author over estimates how easy it is to reach a supercritical state rather than hold it in sub critical mode (requiring occasional input). Though, those German devices are really fascinating looking.

  • Mark Underwood

    That’s a question I’ve wondered myself. Rossi says that he currently has a ‘team’ and I would conjecture that some are originally from Industrial Heat. Given this is true, then when Rossi’s relationship with IH started going sour those individuals may have been faced with a difficult decision: to stick with Rossi and his work while parting from IH, or not? Surely there has been untold personal drama behind the scenes that will sooner or later be revealed.

  • Oystein Lande

    Can anyone call the Judge, and tell him to get going. I’m running out of popcorn 😋

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yeah, while the lawyers are picking pepper out of gnat crap,
      maybe could Rossi retrofit some R/C model airplanes with QuarkXs and fly them around the court house. Show the people the product like Tucker showed the people his “nonexistent” cars.

  • georgehants

    It is interesting that neither Mr. Rossi or anybody in the World has yet to receive a patent on the most basic repeatable Cold Fusion.
    Mr. Rossi etc. seem to be very confident that somebody else cannot find the secret.
    The Enablement Requirement [R-11.2013]
    The enablement requirement refers to the requirement of 35 U.S.C.
    112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph
    that the specification describe how to make and how to use the invention. The invention that one skilled in the art must be enabled to make and use is that defined by the claim(s) t.of the particular application or patent
    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. The information contained in the disclosure of an application must be sufficient to inform those skilled in the relevant art how to both make and use the claimed invention.
    However, to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
    112, first paragraph, it is not necessary to “enable one of ordinary
    skill in the art to make and use a perfected, commercially viable embodiment absent a claim limitation to that effect.” CFMT, Inc. v. Yieldup Int’l Corp., 349 F.3d
    1333, 1338, 68 USPQ2d 1940, 1944 (Fed. Cir.
    2003) (an invention directed to a general system to improve the cleaning
    process for semiconductor wafers was enabled by a disclosure showing improvements in the overall system). Detailed procedures for making and using the invention may not be necessary if the description of the invention itself is sufficient to permit those skilled in the art to make and use the invention. A patent claim is invalid if it is not supported by an enabling disclosure.

    • Ciaranjay

      I am guessing here that the patent process takes a long time to bake. Perhaps it is useful to generate a basic patent to get things going and put down a claim, then later in the process amend it to put in the special sauce.
      Maybe someone knowledgeable could comment.

  • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

    Also the movements wich IH is doing shows that they dont want to be limited to the territories covered by the LA. They applied for patents at Europe wich are outside the LA.

    Skeptopathics can tell whatever they want but this is clearer each day that IH is the one trying to scam and that the E-Cat works.

    Now, for these people wich says, Rossi should make a proper demonstration and all these things. Seeing the development of the things he does better not showing anything else until the product is in the market. Just show us the finished product when you start to sell it. That would be what we really need, because any test wich he could perform, the people wich have been criticising about the measurement just did it to make it feel like all was a big scam.

    If these methods are valid for normal testing of COP in coal or nuclear plants, it is true that in determinated circumstances one could get bad measurements, but it is almost impossible that this would happen in every one test that has been made so far. The only way for all these to be wrong should be a big scam and with the facts we currently have, with IH behaviour that possibility is as low as 0.
    Every time that people says, the measurement method was flawed, they are helping IH with their scam, and IH should have thought that with a near 6 COP like lugano they could argue against the result, claiming a lower COP and they getting the LA for a bargain price.
    But they failed to realize that with Rossi making improvements each day, a undisputable COP of 50 changed all their plans. So we are here now, with IH trying to use excuses to deny payment and retain the IP.
    So, Rossi lawyer should take every hint of advice he can to fight agains this.
    At least here at Spain there are some things one cannot do.
    if you allow a test for a plant through a whole year to be done, you absolutely cant argue after the test ended that it started late or things like these.
    If you allowed the test to be run all these time and you made no objections then, you are allowing that. I hope that Rossi lawyer hits that poin with the precise wording and with references to previous sentences in that way.
    If IH disagreed with what happened then he should have stated before the start of the test something like – The start date failed to be acomplished.
    Later on, we dont agree with the change of the desing.
    We dont agree with the measurement method.
    Any written letter to Rossi stating any of these points would do a big case for them, but the fact is that they just waited silent until the test finished and then claimed again all these, not against the ERV report.
    And it makes me laugh when i read – The results fail to count unoperating reactors. In a multi reactor plant, if you manage to deliver the required energy, even if one of the boilers is shut for manteniance, the true result is that you managed to deliver the energy, that is what counts, nothing else.

    Final words, as IH doesnt seem to be creating their own manufacture it seems that they are just trying to delay the E-Cat to the market as much as they can, and of course, with the current state of things it feels like they just would wait until the case is solved to make it feel like the E-Cat doesnt work. And I wont be surprised if we see a movement on Brilloun Energy just after the case is closed, with reactors ready for the market.

    Rossi should be careful with this movement, and if the case reaches court, his lawyer should be clever enough to prevent further damage if they lose (as a legal trick may be used for that purpose). But even losing they could make the jury to prevent IH or any related company from using the technology.

  • pg


    • Mats002

      This must be a biological count down clock! The accuracy is correct in days but not on the hour. The internal clock must be drifting but that is compensated by the emotional expression. I like it! Wonder what it will do at zero…

      • Andrew

        When the timer hits 0 there will be disappointment as nothing will have changed.

    • SG

      Are you claiming to have inside information?

      • artefact

        AR said the test takes one week and it started on Monday.

    • US_Citizen71

      +4 ÷ 5 – 7

      • Mats002

        I think pg is a chemist, be careful using advanced math. I am in IT, know only AND and OR logic but you must be a physiscist – am I right?

        • Steve Swatman

          Could be IF-Then-Goto

  • Engineer48

    So it seems.