USQL, JM Products Post Corporate Disclosure Statements: ‘No Parent Company of J.M. Products’

There are a couple of new documents that have been posted in the court docket today, one on behalf of United States Quantum Leap (USQL) and one by JM Products, each titled Certificate of Interested Parties. The documents are numbers 93 and 94 are available at this link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BzKtdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk

The documents, filed by lawyers from each company, are very similar. One statement that is of broader interest is from JM Products, which states “Third-Party Defendant, J.M. Products, Inc., hereby certifies that there is no parent corporation of J.M. Products, Inc.” This would seem to be in contradiction to the statement from page 25 the IH-Leonardo Copr license agreement which states that “JMC is owned by an entity formed in the United Kingdom.”

I imagine this will be a point of interest and discussion for people following the court case, and may be something that is brought up in court as well, because of the role of JM Products who according to Andrea Rossi was involved in a manufacturing process using energy from the 1MW E-Cat plant during the 1-year test in Florida.

  • Omega Z

    Why does no body asks questions about IH/Darden.

    Shouldn’t it have been Rossi draging his feet If there was problems with the E-cat. Why was it Darden delaying the 1 year test. Any reasonable person would want that accomplished as soon as possible to know whether they had a viable business product. Darden could have selected the location and the customer of his choice. Where were Dardens Priorities?

    Why was Darden Inc filing patents on Rossi’s IP without Rossi’s knowledge. You can start to see where Dardens Priorities were. To squeeze Rossi out of the picture without ever finishing the agreement and fully paying for Rossi’s IP.

    Why was Darden creating new LLC’s in different juridictions all the while telling Rossi they were all the same as doing business with Industrial heat LLC & Cherokee. And that Rossi should assign the IP to these new LLC’s. Was there any legal paper work to this all being of the same entity. I don’t think so. Multiple LLC’s is a Darden business M.O. creating a legal quagmire down the road. As 1 business litigant against Darden in 1 of His brownfield projects said, It makes it very hard to follow the money and determine who is legally liable allowing that burden to fall on others.

    Rossi say’s Darden implied the Backing of the Cherokee fund and I have no reason to disbelieve otherwise. In multiple interviews with Darden, Cherokee was always mentioned and tho Darden never claimed Cherokee backing, He NEVER said it was not. In Court, A lie by omission is still a lie. Is Darden guilty of fraud???

    As Darden is not the sole Founder of Cherokee, I also doubt he had the authority to claim such backing. Even if he did, Cherokees income is far short of what would be necessary. It would take well over half a dozen years to pay Rossi and as multiple brownfield projects have fallen into bankruptcy, likely doesn’t have a credit line to achieve such.

    If people were to scrutinize Darden and his business practices just half as much as they scrutinize Rossi, They would likely have a very different view. There’s a reason Thomas Darden was getting out of the brownfield remediation business. There was a dwindling pool of investors willing to work with him. One should question Why…

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      Seeing this, full of misunderstandings and misinformation, which would require a tome for a clear and complete answer, I wrote that answer at http://coldfusioncommunity.net/questions-about-industrial-heat/

      I will see replies to this post, and comments and contributions are welcome on coldfusioncommunity.net.

  • radvar

    That link is a great read. The “point/counterpoint” format really brings the competing claims to life.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Truth theory consistent with data, scam theories have thus far run into inconsistencies.

  • Andrew

    /popcorn

  • Omega Z

    We ALL tend to forget the reason for this being in court.

    It’s been said that Rossi offered to return the original $11.5 million in return for Industrial Heat/Darden INC rescinding all rights/claims on Rossi’s IP.

    It’s also been said that Industrial Heat/Darden INC counter offered with offering Rossi a substantial sum tho much less then the $89 million in the agreement.

    SO, this all boils down to Industrial Heat/Darden INC wanting to retain all rights to Rossi’s IP without paying the $89 million even should Rossi return the original payments involved. It seems Industrial Heat/Darden INC are willing to expend large sums of money to retain the technology IP they “Imply” doesn’t work.

    A Woodford representitive said it best. This is merely an IP war. People don’t fight over something that doesn’t work. If it has other issues such as reliability or just not ready for the market, you tend to negotiate those issues.

    • DNI

      That’s only what Rossi say. Dawey Weaver close to IH have denied it. So it all depends on who you trust.

      • Omega Z

        Weaver has made many unfounded claims and has backpedaled more then once. Dewey was just muddying the water and promoting FUD.

        However, again, the statement from the Woodford representative out right stated this is an IP war. The reason Industrial Heat/Darden INC is in court is to retain the IP. It would be much easier and cheaper legally to claim the contract wasn’t fulfilled and revert everything back making everyone whole.

        • Obvious

          One doesn’t have to like what DW says, but it would be wise to pay attention to what he has said so far. It is not mud or FUD, despite how much it may not appeal to many people. He has disseminated about 90% now-verifiable correct information. With some big reveals that have yet to surface, but at least one that is is briefly mentioned in the recent IH et al filing.

          • Bruce__H

            I’ve been wondering when the rest was coming.

            If I were IH and suspicious about Rossi’s activities in 2015, I would have done things like have someone outside the Doral facility keeping track of how many truckloads of reagents and products were being delivered and taken away each day, take a photo over the wall of the famous customer’s site just to see what’s there, do a bit of IR photography (as I think was briefly mentioned in one of the recent IH filings) from a drone high atop the facility to try and locate just where that 1 MW of missing heat has gone, and so on. I’m hoping whatever was done will come out.

            Also, it is my hope that the entire Doral facility is still under lock and key and in IH’s control. That could be interesting too. Like viewing the body ready for autopsy.

            • Obvious

              The Doral facility is (or at least was) being rented by JMP, so IH can’t really keep the facility under lock and key. The containers, sure, they could be locked up. But I would expect that JMP would want the containers out of there so they can either move their factory stuff out, or get back to manufacturing with natural gas power (or whatever).

          • Omega Z

            Yep, That’s how I would do it. Throw out some verifiable truths with some not so verifiable whoppers. I’ve had the unfortunate opportunity of working with people like the Dardens and Deweys. These are the kind of people who brought you the, “If you call in the next 5 minutes, we’ll throw a 2nd set in for free”…

            • radvar

              How true, how sad.

        • DNI

          In my world it’s Rossi who have made many unfounded claims. So as I said it all depends on whom you trust. Hence I think it’s important to write were the information come from.

          • Omega Z

            Dardens and Deweys of the world are Venture Capitalist.

            What more needs to be said???

            • frank

              As said – it depens on who you trust . but don’t state that your opinion to be the truth…

            • clovis ray

              Bingo

    • clovis ray

      Yep,well said.

  • radvar

    This is not about popping a balloon with a pinprick. Unless you already fear that the Doral test is a balloon.

    How relevant is the “owned by entity” statement? Rossi’s attorney’s could simply claim that Rossi made an error (unless there is another explanation). It would not be the first time a “Rossi-ism” was put in writing. It would be difficult to prove that it was an intentional misrepresentation.

    And in any case it would be ludicrous for IH to claim that one such misstatement is evidence of a general intent to commit fraud, or that the entire contract should be nullified because of that single point.

    Judges look through language to see reason, reality and material interests. That particular statement is one of many elements of the overall agreement, which is an agreement on an exchange of value. It is not feasible for IH to claim that their understanding of the exchange of value hinged on that one statement.

    Chill…out….

  • Billy Jackson

    Another lesson for all of us to stop jumping to conclusions. If my memory is correct it was us on these forums that made the connections and we have some how turned our guess work into fact? and then have the audacity to be angry that we are wrong?.

    Even now the relationship with JM Products is unclear. Our best case would be to watch events unfold without jumping to more conclusions until we have a clear picture.

    • roseland67

      Billy,
      I think it was January 17, 2011, when I first saw people jumping to conclusions.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        Jumping to conclusions is not good, but on the other hand there is Akin’s law number 9: Not having all the information one needs doesn’t imply that one shouldn’t start the analysis. (http://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/akins_laws.html )

  • peacelovewoodstock

    Much sound and fury signifying nothing. A “Certificate of Interested Parties” is a tool that a court uses to avoid conflicts of interest, such as that the judge has some financial interest in the outcome (e.g. via shared ownership in a parent corporation of one of the parties to a suit).

    There is NO conflict with the self-certification by JMP on the license agreement. As others have noted, an ‘entity’ does not necessarily mean a corporation.

  • Gerard McEk

    There has always been something suspicious about this ‘customer’.
    Rossi would have had a very strong case if this ‘customer’ were a real company that could testify the amount of heat delivered.
    What do we know about this ‘customer’?
    1. AR met him as another client of his attorney.
    2. After the test the ‘customer’ was identified as JM products.
    3. Now we know JM products is not related.
    4. During the test AR said several times that the ‘customer’ was satisfied.
    5. After the test AR said that the ‘customer’ would buy three of these plants
    6. AR is rather secretive about the manufacture/status of these three plants.
    7. IH has never met the ‘customer’.
    8. …(maybe others can add?)

    Who/what is the ‘customer’?
    I would suggest that AR and ‘somebody’ joined to establish a temporary company that would manufacture something using the heat or (more likely) dump the generated heat, just to speed-up the last phase of the contract with IH. (AR has said that IH didn’t come with a suitable candidate, so he organized it himself). AR said also that the ‘customer’ measured the delivered heat.
    If this temporary joint venture is indeed the case and the heat is dumped, then it weakens AR’s court case, because the heat data can be manipulated. If the ‘customer’ really made heat consuming products, then the case is stronger if the required heat can be calculated from the products and independently verified.

    • Bob Greenyer

      8. Military body?

      • Gerard McEk

        I can’t remember that this was ever mentioned Bob, was it?

        • Bob Greenyer

          not that I know of – but it may fit the bill of a UK entity that is not commercial.

          Rossi has often mentioned dealings with military personnel. It was pure speculation on my part.

    • Gerald

      If you read the mail from AR about finding the customer, a masterpiece etc and to go on like IH did. For me there’s only one conclusion, IH knew what was going on and agreed with it, maybe they hide now behind laws and contract lines but you just don’s invest this kind of money without fact checking. They just let it go for what ever reason. It is probably dirty from both sides, or not and AR did not show his cards. I think the story isn’t over, there are just to many things that just are not logical.

  • Either that (a company coming out and saying it works), or an entity coming out saying that it doesn’t work.

    One of both it must be. But even IH is not clearly saying that Rossi has nothing.

    This is strange, because IH could end this (very expensive) curt case by simply providing evidence that Rossi has nothing and faked all data.
    But they don’t. So why?

  • Pekka Janhunen

    I’m unfamiliar with legalese as well, but clearly a company must always be owned by some legal entity which is sometimes another company or corporation, but can also be (and more commonly is) a person, a government, a foundation etc. (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_entity )

  • Curbina

    This quickly became a sign of triumph for people that thinks that Rossi is a con man. I certainly hink it does not look good, and I hope this does not means what It seems at face value. But it does indeed look very bad for Rossi, at least from my point of view.

  • wpj

    So, what about the three reactors that were being built for the parent company? Another fabrication?

  • Such a misrepresentation in the license agreement spells real trouble for Rossi & co.

    • SG

      Perhaps so. But that assumes that JMC wasn’t owned by an entity formed in the United Kingdom at the time of entering into the license agreement. Circumstances can certainly change with time.

      • The saving scenario I guess would be that the parent UK company wanted no part of this circus and divested itself before this statement and JMP/Fabiani agreed to keep them out of it.

        Smells like a reach to me…

        …but I guess we’ll have to see what else comes out. If Rossi & co. were acting in a fraudulent way, at least in when it came to the 1 year test, then there will be many more indications.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      “Owned by an entity formed in the UK” and “having no parent corporation” are not necessarily contradictory. For example it could be some foundation which is based in the UK and which owned/owns the company. Or, as someone suggested, the ownership could have changed meanwhile. Every company is owned by some legal entity, the question is then if there was a connection to the UK, and if not, is it relevant.

      • Any owners would have a financial interest in the outcome which are listed in the same document. The only possibility, really, aside from the individuals named in the conspiracy is Platinum American Trust.

        So I guess maybe Platinum American Trust was formed in the United Kingdom and named Henry Johnson its trustee. As a trust it would not be a corporation, so there’s that. Designating Johnson as the trustee would allow them to keep their anonymity. So maybe JM after all?

        We need to find out what we can about this PAT entity. Is it just some shell set up by Henry Johnson to make things look more real to IH? Is it UK based? Who are the owners and officers? Is there any public info on it? Some light googling turns up nothing.

        EDIT: and who is Francesco Di Giovanni, beneficiary of said trust?

        • wpj

          Guess what company controls the Pt market…………

          • SG

            Okay, I give, which one?

            • wpj

              Same one that publishes the “Platinum Metals Review” and hosts the annual Platinum “fix” dinner in London.

              JM

        • JustKidding

          “Francesco Di Giovanni, the beneficiary of the Platinum American Trust dated effective as of July 14, 2014”

          According to Linkedin there’s one “Francesco Di Giovanni” with this Experience:

          Daikin Applied Europe
          Product Manager
          Daikin Applied Europe
          February 2015 – Present (1 year 11 months)

          Thermocold Costruzioni S.r.l.
          Progettazione, Ricerca & Sviluppo
          Thermocold Costruzioni S.r.l.
          January 2012 – December 2014 (3 years)Bari Area, Italy

          July 14, 2014, this “Francesco Di Giovanni” worked for Thermocold Costruzioni S.r.l., so obviously Thermocold is the secret customer of J.M. Products and it hides behind an UK Entity “Platinum American Trust”. lol

          “Innovative systems for heating and air conditioning”
          http://www.thermocold.it/index.php?lang=en

          • JustGuessing

            Thermocold / Product lines and systems /
            Heavy commercial and industrial / Heating:

            “Energy efficient systems and solutions specifically designed and engineered to meet the needs of heating, cooling and hot water production, for medium/large installations with outputs from 40kW to 1800kW.”
            http://www.thermocold.it/index.php?lang=en

            Daikin:

            Daikin Applied Europe is a member Daikin Industries, Ltd., which is a Fortune 1000 company with 2013 revenues in excess of $18 billion and more than 51,000 employees worldwide, making it the largest HVAC manufacturer in the world.
            http://www.daikinapplied.eu/en/index/page/azienda/3

            Florida connection?

            Daikin Applied Latin America LLC
            7205 NW 19 St., Suite 310
            Miami, FL 33126
            http://daikinlatam.com/

            Hmmm… What’s the likelihood to find a “Francesco Di Giovanni” working for such companies?

            • artefact

              Thanks JustK/D

    • Ophelia Rump

      Had you considered the possibility that they recently separated from the parent company since the test so that the parent company can just walk away.