I agree with Craig. My reading of the the Agreement is the same as his.
Therefore, I have guessed at some new unforeseen situation that IH thinks
would make the agreement moot, such as a Government Order of secrecy, or one
withholding the ability of IH to give IP to the Chinese entities.
I do not presume to know if Florida law or US law automatically cause a
change in such agreements that become binding on all parties of the
agreement. I can believe that a secrecy order would bind all involved,
making the agreement, in effect, non operative or moot.
Bob Cook
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Haynie
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 5:41 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Industrial Heat Patent?
If Industrial Heat says that the reactor doesn't work, then why did they
apply for a patent with Rossi's technology?
https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2015127263&recNum=1&maxRec=&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=&queryString=&tab=PCT+Biblio
https://www.google.com/patents/WO2015127263A3?cl=en
Rossi is now saying that they have just applied for another one:
"Today I have been informed that IH has again made another patent using
my name as the inventor and my invention, to make a patent assigned to
Industrial Heat, without my authorization."
If they are patenting Rossi's intellectual property, which he sold to
them in this deal which IH did not finalize, then this would explain why
Rossi is suing, instead of just letting it go.
Craig
