Merged Cold Fusion Claims

[dlorde]

http://www.google.com/patents/US20090290674[/url]
http://www.google.com/patents/US20020080903

They do pretty much deal with Cold Fusion, but, if you check on them at the USPTO PAIR site, you'll see they're both abandoned, having been rejected by the examiner for a lack of utility, and insufficient description.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a nuclide transmutation device and a nuclide transmutation method associated, for example, with disposal processes in which long-lived radioactive waste is transmuted into short-lived radioactive nuclides or stable nuclides, and technologies that generate rare earth elements from abundant elements found in the natural world.

Doesn't sound very like CF to me - but then I'm no physicist.

 

[Horatius]

Doesn't sound very like CF to me - but then I'm no physicist.

Yeah, that's the set-up for their alleged invention, but if you read further, you'll see them start to discuss what are clearly cold-fusion inspired techniques. From their abstract:

The device 10 that produces nuclide transmutation comprises a structure body 11 that is substantially plate shaped and made of palladium (Pd) or palladium alloy, or another metal that absorbs hydrogen (for example, Ti) or an alloy thereof, and a material 14 that undergoes nuclide transmutation laminated on one surface 11A among the two surfaces of this structure body 11. The one surface 11A side of the structure body 11, for example, is made a region in which the pressure of the deuterium is high due to pressure or electrolysis and the like, and the other surface 11B side, for example, is a region in which the pressure of the deuterium is low due to vacuum exhausting and the like, and thereby, a flow of deuterium in the structure body 11 is produced, and nuclide transmutation is carried out by a reaction between the deuterium and the material 14 that undergoes nuclide transmutation.

Also, read paragraph 0017 of the description, it goes into greater detail.


This is a common tactic by woo-patent applicants. They know if they start talking about "producing energy", the examiner will pick up on it being cold fusion or free energy devices, so they re-write their applications so that the technology appears to be doing something else (like the nuclear transmutation here). That doesn't raise as many red flags, and so the examiner often doesn't consider the question of utility at all, letting the applicant slide on the most important question.

Note that, in this case, they have no requirement to show that extra energy is being produced - they're simply trying to transmute elements, and would claim that they aren't even trying to produce energy. Transmuting elements has other useful applications, after all, like in reducing radioactive waste, or in producing medical isotopes. I've seen lots of legitimate applications in both those areas. They're trying to sneak their cold fusion devices in under cover of these technologies.

Why does this sometimes work? It's a function of how patent applications are classified, which leads to different examiners working on the cases. A claim to a device that produces energy would be in a different class than one that transmutes elements. In the US office, there are a lot of examiners, and so each examiner deals with a fairly small "slice" of classifications. So the examiner who normally works on energy producing systems might be aware of the cold fusion issue, and raise this objection, while the examiner who works on transmutation might not be so aware, allowing the application to pass without comment.

Here in Canada, there are fewer examiners, so it's more likely that one examiner would see both types of applications, and so prevent them both from issuing.

Luckily in these cases, the examiner did catch on, but that doesn't always happen.

 

[dlorde]

... This is a common tactic by woo-patent applicants. They know if they start talking about "producing energy", the examiner will pick up on it being cold fusion or free energy devices, so they re-write their applications so that the technology appears to be doing something else (like the nuclear transmutation here). That doesn't raise as many red flags, and so the examiner often doesn't consider the question of utility at all, letting the applicant slide on the most important question.

OIC - thanks for the heads-up

Who'd be a patent-examiner? I don't envy Einstein if it was like this in his day...

 

[Horatius]

OIC - thanks for the heads-up

Who'd be a patent-examiner? I don't envy Einstein if it was like this in his day...

It's actually a pretty good job for a skeptical type person, as it's literally doing skepticism every day. An inventor claims he's the first in the world to do XYZ, and that XYZ would not be obvious to do, and the examiner must collect evidence and construct arguments to disprove these claims. The examiner must also reconsider his own arguments in light of further evidence or arguments provided by the applicant.

There have been times when, halfway through writing my first report, I've decided my argument is complete ********, and thrown it all away, and other times I've had to agree with the applicant's response that explains why I'm an idiot who doesn't understand **** (in polite terms, of course). Of course, most of the time, we meet at some kind of middle ground, but those are usually the boring cases that don't make for good stories

 

[Andy_Ross]

If Rossi is confident it works get iit onto 'Dragons Den'

 

[trebor]

Interestingly, I see Piantelli's big announcement was made in May 2012 that in 'just a few months' he could produce a commercial product. And then started selling shares.

Its nearly a year later, where can these commercial products be purchased?
I could do with a new water heater.

Or is it that after 20 years he is in exactly the same position as Rossi; lots of talk, nothing he is willing to actually let people use/test?

Question for you pteridine; did you buy any of his shares?

As pteridine brought this chap up, does anyone know what happened to him?
Or if he is in fact the 'respectable researcher' many seem to assume.

 

[tsig]

"Uh, yes," to use the latest clever phrasing. Read the claims, carefully. It was found, after a great deal of work, that Boron impurities in the Pd were important in causing the effect, hence the addition of boron to the Pd. At the time, one had to make LENR claims secondary and so the claim of a membrane was shown first. From the USPTO database:

"Claim 14. A method of generating energy comprising the steps of: providing the electrode of claim 13, connecting the electrode to a cathode, immersing the electrode and the cathode in water containing deuterium, and applying a current to the electrode and the cathode.

"Preferably the alloy composition of the present invention can be formed into a membrane for use in the purification of hydrogen, or can be made into an electrode useful for numerous purposes, including the loading of the electrode with deuterium for the generation of heat energy, or other standard electrochemical purposes."

Protip: When your power generator has power going into it instead of out of it you are not generating power.

 

[pteridine]

Protip: When your power generator has power going into it instead of out of it you are not generating power.

Look up "field coils"

 

[ben m]

Look up "field coils"

A real generator can power its own field coils.

 

[pteridine]

A real generator can power its own field coils.

Yes, it does, but power still has to flow in from some source to get power out.

 

[nathan]

Yes, it does, but power still has to flow in from some source to get power out.

Those wires are generally entirely contained inside the generator box. Are Rossi's?

No, no they're not

 

[Andy_Ross]

Yes, it does, but power still has to flow in from some source to get power out.

So if it is generating it can supply that power?

 

[tsig]

Yes, it does, but power still has to flow in from some source to get power out.

That usually occurs in the form of rotational energy from a prime mover however this device is supposed to generate it's own power so why should any power be fed into it?

Field coils are energized by the generator itself.

 

[cjameshuff]

Yes, it does, but power still has to flow in from some source to get power out.

As already pointed out, the generator can and generally does supply that power itself.

A better example would be fusion reactors, which consume quite a large amount of power. To be a useful power source, they still need to produce enough power to run themselves. From real fusion researchers, we have projections of power output scaling with size and various plasma parameters and measurement of actual fusion power output in experiments that clearly produce real fusion reactions.

We have nothing of the sort from Rossi. He has yet to demonstrate that his device produces any energy gain at all, and is any more than an overly complex resistance heater. There's nothing at all to indicate any possibility of ever closing the loop, despite claims of power outputs that would make doing so trivial.

 

[Horatius]

"Claim 14. A method of generating energy comprising the steps of: providing the electrode of claim 13, connecting the electrode to a cathode, immersing the electrode and the cathode in water containing deuterium, and applying a current to the electrode and the cathode.

"Preferably the alloy composition of the present invention can be formed into a membrane for use in the purification of hydrogen, or can be made into an electrode useful for numerous purposes, including the loading of the electrode with deuterium for the generation of heat energy, or other standard electrochemical purposes."

I've looked into the prosecution history of this patent, and it's a bit Wonky. I've sent an e-mail to a colleague to see what he can tell me about it, and will report back.

Okay, I finally heard back, and my contact has confirmed my suspicions.

This claim is pretty clearly directed to a cold fusion method, but its prosecution history is a bit wonky. It was initially withdrawn as part of a restriction requirement. This is essentially the examiner saying it was directed towards a different invention from most of the other claims, and as such, it wasn't examined along with the other claims.

But then, in the notice of allowance, it was rejoined. The examiner basically re-considered the question of it being a different invention, and reversed that earlier decision based on some technicalities. The notice of allowance says it was "fully examined for patentabilty under 37 CFR 1.104". It's that last bit that I was wondering about - would the examiner have considered a utility objection at this point of the examination? Reading 37 CFR 1.104, it's not clear, but I suspected not.

My contact responded thusly:

The restriction requirement is a bit of a red herring. The bottom line is that the examiner didn't consider whether the claimed invention would actually work as described; this is something that examiners quite often miss in US prosecution.
...

There's really not much to be done about it; you can't request a reexam for patentability issues other than prior art (and the patent isn't eligible for the new post-grant review process because it already issued).

So, it seems likely that the examiner never gave any serious consideration of the utility of this claim (that is, whether or not it actually works). This is one of the problems with the patent system I've dealt with before, and have been attempting to improve, but it's an uphill battle.

The details of this patent are at:

http://www.google.com/patents/US7381368

Notice that this patent is filed in US Patent Classification 420/463. These classes are assigned based on the main independent claim, which in this case is this claim:

1. An alloy comprising palladium and boron;

wherein at room temperature the alloy has a two-phase structure, comprising crystallites of a first phase and crystallites of a second phase;

wherein both the first phase and the second phase are solid solutions of palladium and boron;

wherein the crystallites of the first phase and the crystallites of the second phase are free of hydrogen;

wherein the first phase and the second phase have the same crystal structure;
wherein the first phase and the second phase have different lattice parameters;
wherein the alloy is free of palladium-boron intermetallic compounds; and
wherein the alloy is free of hydride compounds.

Class 420/463 deals with "ALLOYS OR METALLIC COMPOSITIONS", and specifically with those with a palladium base. As such, the examiner who approved this patent, and thus claim 14 as well, would not have had experience with devices or methods for generating energy, as is recited in claim 14.

Had they maintained the restriction requirement, that claim would have been classified differently, and thus would likely have been examined by someone more familiar with the issues surrounding cold fusion.

So, the practical upshot is, claim 14 issued as is did because the applicants got lucky - they snuck it in with claims from a different class of invention, and got an examiner who wasn't familiar with cold fusion cases. This is a known weakness of the patent system, and one I've seen exploited before.

 

[tsig]

Okay, I finally heard back, and my contact has confirmed my suspicions.

This claim is pretty clearly directed to a cold fusion method, but its prosecution history is a bit wonky. It was initially withdrawn as part of a restriction requirement. This is essentially the examiner saying it was directed towards a different invention from most of the other claims, and as such, it wasn't examined along with the other claims.

But then, in the notice of allowance, it was rejoined. The examiner basically re-considered the question of it being a different invention, and reversed that earlier decision based on some technicalities. The notice of allowance says it was "fully examined for patentabilty under 37 CFR 1.104". It's that last bit that I was wondering about - would the examiner have considered a utility objection at this point of the examination? Reading 37 CFR 1.104, it's not clear, but I suspected not.

My contact responded thusly:





So, it seems likely that the examiner never gave any serious consideration of the utility of this claim (that is, whether or not it actually works). This is one of the problems with the patent system I've dealt with before, and have been attempting to improve, but it's an uphill battle.

The details of this patent are at:

http://www.google.com/patents/US7381368

Notice that this patent is filed in US Patent Classification 420/463. These classes are assigned based on the main independent claim, which in this case is this claim:




Class 420/463 deals with "ALLOYS OR METALLIC COMPOSITIONS", and specifically with those with a palladium base. As such, the examiner who approved this patent, and thus claim 14 as well, would not have had experience with devices or methods for generating energy, as is recited in claim 14.

Had they maintained the restriction requirement, that claim would have been classified differently, and thus would likely have been examined by someone more familiar with the issues surrounding cold fusion.

So, the practical upshot is, claim 14 issued as is did because the applicants got lucky - they snuck it in with claims from a different class of invention, and got an examiner who wasn't familiar with cold fusion cases. This is a known weakness of the patent system, and one I've seen exploited before.

To sum my understanding:

1. being granted a patent does not guarantee that the device actually works.

2. it is possible to weasel word a patent application so that the claim is obscure enough to pass. (see 1.)

3. it would be* possible to patent an anti gravity device.(deduction from 1 &2)


*might have been done

 

[trebor]

3. it would be* possible to patent an anti gravity device.(deduction from 1 &2)


*might have been done

How about :
http://www.google.com/patents/US6960975

A space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state is provided comprising a hollow superconductive shield, an inner shield, a power source, a support structure, upper and lower means for generating an electromagnetic field, and a flux modulation controller.

No idea if it was ever granted but the figures are fun

 

[Horatius]

To sum my understanding:

1. being granted a patent does not guarantee that the device actually works.

2. it is possible to weasel word a patent application so that the claim is obscure enough to pass. (see 1.)

3. it would be* possible to patent an anti gravity device.(deduction from 1 &2)


*might have been done

Yes, pretty much. See the next post, for instance.

How about :
http://www.google.com/patents/US6960975



No idea if it was ever granted but the figures are fun

Yes, that's an issued patent, and again, it shows the problem with classifications I mentioned earlier. That's US Class 335/216, which covers:

335 / HD ELECTRICITY: MAGNETICALLY OPERATED SWITCHES, MAGNETS, AND ELECTROMAGNETS

209 DF MAGNETS AND ELECTROMAGNETS {10}
216 .~ Superconductive type

So it was examined by someone who usually does magnetic switches.

I'm pretty sure the Examiner just said, "Ah, **** it, no one will ever even try to build one!", and allowed it.

If you go to that page, and click the link for "Download USPTO Public PAIR data", you can see the prosecution history. It issued without any examiner's reports, because he couldn't find any prior art that applied (big surprise, there!). Look at the "NOA" documents for details on this.

Luckily, though, its status is "Patent Expired Due to NonPayment of maintenance Fees Under 37 CFR 1.362", so if you do want to build one, you're in the clear

 

[acementhead]

pteridine, an opportunity for you.

If you were willing to put up a reasonable amount of money, say, at least US$100,000 I would put up the same amount on an even bet. I would be willing to put up up to US$1 MM. I would travel anywhere in the world to facilitate this. Interested?

PS Obviously you would be betting that Rossi's device works as advertised. I would take the opposite.

 

[acementhead]

My offer to pteridine

open to all.

Any Rossiite who wants to make free money here? See my previous post. Put my money in your pocket.