Talk-Polywell.org

So, did not the complaint state that on successful completion of the 1MW customer test that the $89 million was due? So failure of the test could be supported in many ways

To be more clear, this stage is about the technical legal aspects of the complaint, not the substance. That comes next.

The court will first decide if the complaint is technically correct, then they will proceed to decide on its content based on further argument and evidences provided by the litigants. You are discussing content and substance, vice legality.

Think of it this way: They must first establish that the complaint is legally valid, and targets the right folks for the right things. Then, they will look at the content, and decide who is right or wrong. We are not yet at the right or wrong on content yet, first the complaint must be established as legally valid. To this end, IH did way more homework than Rossiclown, and have painted a strong picture that the complaints are bogus. Now, Rossiclown gets a chance to amend the complaint and fix errors (if he can) that IH pointed out (like who can be sued, he is arguing against his own agreement, there was no harm, etc.). If he can not fix the errors pointed out by IH to the court's satisfaction, then those errors will be dismissed. What remains, can then proceed to litigation.

So to summarize the process will more or less look like this:
Complaint (Rossiclown) - this states claimed injuries, why, and who did it, and damages sought.
Summons (Court to IH & Co.) - notice to defendants that Complaint has been filed
Motions (IH or Rossiclown) - Motion to Dismiss from IH arguing complaint does not contain any/all injuries, why, who and is thus baseless. Rossiclown could Motion for Summary Judgement where he argues that IH agrees with presented Complaint arguments, and thus no trial is needed (not likely, as IH has not answered yet, nor will they agree enough). Motions can also include time/procedural content, as we have already seen in this case.
Answer (IH & Co.) - this is where IH says I agree/don't agree with items in complaint and why
Discovery - (IH & Co., Rossiclown) - both sides show their cards and present supporting evidence and documents to the court for consideration. This is where we get to see the goods from everyone, unless it is requested to be protected from public disclosure. I suspect Rossiclown may try to play this game, but IH will want it all public. Presented 'cards' to be played in court can be contested by the opposing side and subsequently barred from use in the trial if argued effectively and the court buys it.
Trial (Rossiclown, IH & Co.) - here both sides sequentially present their cards to the court (judge or jury), and make their arguments.
Judgement - (Court) - the determination is made and presented. Normally, if the complaint is defeated, the participants will walk away, however, it can be that the court finds malicious intent on the part of the plaintiff, and bads things can happen from that. If the complaint (or parts of it) is upheld, then damages will be awarded accordingly.

IH has several avenues to go back at Rossiclown, this includes Intentional Tort complaint(s), or pressing for criminal proceedings.

Newest addition to the IH Jones Day Legal team: Chris Lomax, another serious player.
http://www.jonesday.com/clomax/

Rossiclown is looking very outgunned.

Although the more IH spends on lawyers, the more you have to wonder whether Rossi's case isn't meritless after all.

Carl White wrote:Although the more IH spends on lawyers, the more you have to wonder whether Rossi's case isn't meritless after all.

If I had that much money on the line, I'd be as thorough, if not more.

Purely speculative, but my sense is that IH is seeking to permanently sink Rossiclown's ship.

On the eve of news about the recent QuarkX test for a customer/partner, here is something for the trolls like lying ladajo to ponder, who said they would believe MFMP..

BREAKING: The E-Cat has been replicated—here’s the recipe!
https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/ ... he-recipe/

Oh Parallel,
Nice cherry pick of old news that was later shown to be in error. And, don't forget that the several subsequent attempts to replicate the announcement also failed.

Shame about the whole rf noise messing with the detectors thing. This is why we do real attempts at science; to learn and grow the body of knowledge. Unlike whatever it is that idiot Rossiclown does, which is decidedly not science.

Parallel, if you want to comment on something useful, why don't you analyze my steam discussions from above. I would love for you to provide real critique.

ECAT QuarkX preliminary report
Report Disclaimer:

THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT AND ALL THE MEASUREMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY ANDREA ROSSI AND HIS TEAM. THEREFORE THESE RESULTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AT ANY EFFECT OTHER THAN AN INTERNAL PROCESS CONTROL, NOTHING MORE.

DESCRIPTION OF THE QUARK X:

Cylinder made with proper material:

Dimensions:
length 30 mm
diam 1 mm
Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h
Light produced (percentage of the energy produced): 0-50%
Electric energy produced: 0-10%
Heat produced: 0- 100%

Light, energy and heat can be modulated to modulate the percentages within the limits above listed, provided the combined percentages must total 100%.

Extremely interesting is the blue light, the analysis of which has resolved theoretical problems related to the roots of the effect.

Temperature on the surface of the QuarkX: more than 1,500*C
Note: 2 other QuarkX put in analogous situation gave the same results.

Further disclaimer:

THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT. IT IS AN INTERNAL REPORT RELATED TO MEASURES MADE BY LEONARDO CORPORATION

End of the report.

Description of the photo:

Photo of the heat exchanger pipe that contains the QuarkX: the light spot is through a light eye hole in the pipe. The blue halo from the hole has been analyzed and has made possible to understand the theoretical roots of the effect: the QuarkX is inside the pipe .

http://ecat.com/news/ecat-quark-x-preli ... t-findings

<munches popcorn>

Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h

???

0.5 * 200 = 100

Rossiclown view of the world, he loves his perfect numbers. And when you are making shit up, it is much easier to use perfect numbers.

This is just more "Rossi says". It's getting tiresome.

And can someone explain to me what Wh/h is? Is that then just Watts?

Skipjack » Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:31 pm

Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h

???

The COP = 100/0.5 = 200
(Not the cack handed way liar ladajo states it.)

Wh/h removes a possible ambiguity about how long it is applied for dummies like the trolls here.