It is all about the way it is written, a patent examination based on LENR application alone might or might have been rejected, but by including it in a list alongside more mainstream applications, and concentrating on material processing side they have found a way to get it through without as much difficulty, that is a relatively way to skin the cat, and I believe Celani is doing something similar.
The patent examination process is rather arbitrary in most cases (for example vast numbers of ridiculously obvious phone and software patents in last 20 years). On 12 September 2012 21:24, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > Jeff Berkowitz wrote: > > Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent >> covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example, >> specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays. >> > > Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know what to make of it. Perhaps the P.O. > has changed its policy. Maybe not . . . In the past, a few patents such > Patterson's got through on a technicality. I do not know what happened here. > > - Jed > >
