H3Tec Challenge

[Jim]

US v. Quadro Corp., 928 F. Supp. 688 - Dist. Court, ED Texas 1996


and

"Case Study of Inoperable Inventions: Why is the USPTO Patenting Pseudoscience"


Come to mind

[Qiaozhi]

US v. Quadro Corp., 928 F. Supp. 688 - Dist. Court, ED Texas 1996


and

"Case Study of Inoperable Inventions: Why is the USPTO Patenting Pseudoscience"


Come to mind

The case study is here -> http://hosted.law.wisc.edu/lawreview...-4/rislove.pdf
Page 1294 onwards makes for some interesting reading, particularly the section on the DKL LifeGuard patent. This patent was actually granted, despite later being confirmed as an inoperable invention by SNL.

[Saturna]

Hmmm...
So what do you think?
Will H3Tec start legal actions against Carl, or will they continue to send email demands and threats without taking any legal action?

Best wishes,
J_P

I suspect they'll do the North Korea thing. Big bluster and attitude, fire a first shot, and then ultimately back down with some excuse, all the while continuing the bombastic talk and threats.

[Jim]

I suspect they'll do the North Korea thing. Big bluster and attitude, fire a first shot, and then ultimately back down with some excuse, all the while continuing the bombastic talk and threats.

Bombastic talk and threats....me like!

That....and useless dealer chatter on their own internet message board

[Art3811]

Do you know if the H3Tec has every been tested by an Independent Testing Lab?

That is the question I ask…Simple and to the point..Art

[Art3811]

This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/805,414, filed May 22, 2007, for "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETECTING ELEMENTS AND COMPOUNDS," which claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. .sctn.119(e) of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/747,894, for "ELEMENT SENSOR," filed May 22, 2006. Both of the foregoing applications are fully incorporated herein by reference.
Here is a little more reading you should also understand…Art

[Carl-NC]

Do you know if the H3Tec has every been tested by an Independent Testing Lab?

H3 has made prior statements that Chemir tested and "certified" the device:

"The H3 claims have been tested at Chemir Labs."

"Anytime you want to set up a test as the we did at Chemir to certify our claims..."

"It had to pass a double blind test for clams [sic] certifications."

However, I contacted Chemir and asked about H3... they declined to provide any information on what was tested, citing a confidentiality agreement. Fair enough. But they flatly stated they do not do double-blind testing. It's interesting that H3 refuses to disclose the test details or, better, give Chemir the green light to disclose them. Surely the results would verify H3's claims, wouldn't they?

Another interesting tidbit... in one of their responses to me Chemir said,

"I appreciate your effort to notify us of a potential situation where a person or company is falsely representing our business or relationship."

I noticed that in the last exchanges on TNet, H3 was very careful not to mention Chemir by name. I would not be surprised if they got a cease-and-desist letter from Chemir.

Bottom line: The H3 statements (or implications) that Chemir tested the device, or "certified" the device, or that the device has passed a "double blind test" are probably false. Certainly, they are avoiding it now.

[Jim]

By all appearances....the duel dowsing rod version (Tricorder) has not actually been tested @ Chemir. Video evidence confirms a single dowsing rod version was used.

[Qiaozhi]

Adding more fuel to the fire

Will H3Tec be the next to trick the military and police? And what is nano ionic resonance?

In case some of you haven't seen this ->

http://sniffexquestions.blogspot.com/2009/11/will-h3-tec-be-next-to-trick-military.html

In particular, notice this comment:
GOVERNMENT WARNING!!

The US Department of Justice has specifically warned against these types of devices!

[Rudy]

My analysis of the H3 Tec patent

I just finished looking at the "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETECTING ELEMENTS AND COMPOUNDS" from Charles L. Christensen. US Pat 7,750,634 B1

The patent does contain H3 Tec copyrighted information, in the form of some PCB artwork, parts lists and source code. This probably helped lead the patent examiner into believing that the apparatus described is able to perform the intended function.

In the detailed description of the embodiment, a rather simplistic explanation of nuclear magnetic resonance is given, along with an explanation on how the resonant frequency of an element can be affected by external environmental factors such as the presence of a static magnetic field (ie. the earth's magnetic field). It then talks about how their electronics can integrate the effects of these environmental factors and perform a calculation that computes the effect of these factors and produces a new, corrected, NMR frequency. This drives a frequency generator and tunable filters to create a "clean" sinusoid of the desired frequency. This frequency can be amplified and fed to a Detection Module.

The above mentioned Detection Module uses this amplified frequency to "stimulate" the target element while at the same time it receives a reflected signal from the desired element. Then it starts to go downhill from there.

The Detection Module described in the patent is a ... dowsing rod with an electrical connection. But this is so wrong on so many levels that I don't know where to begin.

The idea of pumping an amplified signal (ie. many volts) into the dowsing rod so it can somehow propagate this signal to a remote location where the element to be detected is located, while at the same time using the same dowsing rod to receive a reflected signal from the element, which if it existed would be fractions of microvolts in amplitude, is ludicrous at best. It is like standing next to Niagara falls and trying to listen to a sound of a needle dropping on the floor. One could say that perhaps they do a TDMX of the dowsing rod, but that is not discussed, and neither is the subject of quantifying the effect on the NMR frequency signal when the stimulus signal is suddenly removed. This is much like the signal decay time vs sampling delay time on a PI detector.

My disbelief compounded when it is claimed that this weak signal, again if it existed, would be sufficiently strong to cause the dowsing rod to deflect and point in the direction of the source of the reflected signal.

Does this work, or can this work? I'd bet money it doesn't

[Carl-NC]

Does this work, or can this work? I'd bet money it doesn't

Heck, even H3's supporters don't believe it works. Not a single one is saying, "Hey Chuck, jump on this guy's challenge, show him the H3 works just like you claim, take his money, and embarrass ol' Carl once and fer all." Instead, every last one of them is crying for legal action to silence me.

If the very people selling the device are telling us it doesn't work, why should we think otherwise?

[hung]

Wrong.
Your autism is showing again.

"H3 Tec demands that you return the H3 detector, H3 software, and H3 system as defined in the following paragraphs within 30 days of the date of this email ...

You are not the licensee and have obtained this device illegally. Failure to return H3 Tec’s property will force us to seek remedy in a court in the State of Utah where the contract was initiated.

Each H3 system (training, manuals, and other materials manufactured by H3), H3 detector, and its corresponding H3 software is sold through a license agreement between H3 Tec, LLC and the licensed end user or owner of the device and is under a strict contract and Nondisclosure Agreement (NDA) signed by H3 Tec, LLC and the licensee. The license and agreement are specific to the user who purchased this license package and was trained on the correct use of the H3 device; neither the license, device, software, system, nor the agreement is transferable. Any breach of this license and NDA is a violation of the H3 user agreement that is put in place at the time of purchase.

(...)I encourage you to consider carefully before tampering with, reverse engineering, or testing any H3 device. You are prohibited from disclosing any company-proprietary information to which you may have access. We will not hesitate to invoke legal action if you proceed. "

***
This is the real reason on why you are about to be sued.
You have comitted the crime of piracy. And Jim of exposing unathorized copyrighted material, among other things.

Your 'challenge' or whatever, is insignificant to substantiate the object of the cause and would be completely disregarded in court.

PS. Now we know who SWR has got the H3tec's pictures from to expose over TNET.

[Jim]

Wrong.

This is the real reason on why you are about to be sued.
You have comitted[sic] the crime of piracy. And Jim of exposing unathorized[sic] copyrighted material, among other things.

Your 'challenge' or whatever, is insignificant to substantiate the object of the cause and would be completely disregarded in court.

PS. Now we know who SWR has got the H3tec's pictures from to expose over TNET.

Jim exposed unauthorized copyrighted material, eh? Bad Jim, no doughnut!

[Jim]

I just finished looking at the "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETECTING ELEMENTS AND COMPOUNDS" from Charles L. Christensen. US Pat 7,750,634 B1

The patent does contain H3 Tec copyrighted information, in the form of some PCB artwork, parts lists and source code. This probably helped lead the patent examiner into believing that the apparatus described is able to perform the intended function.

In the detailed description of the embodiment, a rather simplistic explanation of nuclear magnetic resonance is given, along with an explanation on how the resonant frequency of an element can be affected by external environmental factors such as the presence of a static magnetic field (ie. the earth's magnetic field). It then talks about how their electronics can integrate the effects of these environmental factors and perform a calculation that computes the effect of these factors and produces a new, corrected, NMR frequency. This drives a frequency generator and tunable filters to create a "clean" sinusoid of the desired frequency. This frequency can be amplified and fed to a Detection Module.

The above mentioned Detection Module uses this amplified frequency to "stimulate" the target element while at the same time it receives a reflected signal from the desired element. Then it starts to go downhill from there.

The Detection Module described in the patent is a ... dowsing rod with an electrical connection. But this is so wrong on so many levels that I don't know where to begin.

The idea of pumping an amplified signal (ie. many volts) into the dowsing rod so it can somehow propagate this signal to a remote location where the element to be detected is located, while at the same time using the same dowsing rod to receive a reflected signal from the element, which if it existed would be fractions of microvolts in amplitude, is ludicrous at best. It is like standing next to Niagara falls and trying to listen to a sound of a needle dropping on the floor. One could say that perhaps they do a TDMX of the dowsing rod, but that is not discussed, and neither is the subject of quantifying the effect on the NMR frequency signal when the stimulus signal is suddenly removed. This is much like the signal decay time vs sampling delay time on a PI detector.

My disbelief compounded when it is claimed that this weak signal, again if it existed, would be sufficiently strong to cause the dowsing rod to deflect and point in the direction of the source of the reflected signal.

Does this work, or can this work? I'd bet money it doesn't

Thanks for taking the time to post your analysis. Your bet that the device does not work as advertised is a safe one. One that I, and others...concur with.

[J_Player]

Wrong.
Your autism is showing again.

"H3 Tec demands that you return the H3 detector, H3 software, and H3 system as defined in the following paragraphs within 30 days of the date of this email ...

You are not the licensee and have obtained this device illegally. Failure to return H3 Tec’s property will force us to seek remedy in a court in the State of Utah where the contract was initiated.

Each H3 system (training, manuals, and other materials manufactured by H3), H3 detector, and its corresponding H3 software is sold through a license agreement between H3 Tec, LLC and the licensed end user or owner of the device and is under a strict contract and Nondisclosure Agreement (NDA) signed by H3 Tec, LLC and the licensee. The license and agreement are specific to the user who purchased this license package and was trained on the correct use of the H3 device; neither the license, device, software, system, nor the agreement is transferable. Any breach of this license and NDA is a violation of the H3 user agreement that is put in place at the time of purchase.

(...)I encourage you to consider carefully before tampering with, reverse engineering, or testing any H3 device. You are prohibited from disclosing any company-proprietary information to which you may have access. We will not hesitate to invoke legal action if you proceed. "

***
This is the real reason on why you are about to be sued.
You have comitted the crime of piracy. And Jim of exposing unathorized copyrighted material, among other things.

Your 'challenge' or whatever, is insignificant to substantiate the object of the cause and would be completely disregarded in court.

PS. Now we know who SWR has got the H3tec's pictures from to expose over TNET.

Crime of piracy?
Isn't piracy addressed in maritime law?

The US courts will not prosecute any act of piracy in the matter of H3Tec or its licence agreement with their customers. Nor will the H3Tec company make any claims that Carl violated their license agreement, because Carl has no agreement with H3Tec of any kind.

If they decide to make demands in a legal action against Carl, they will need to prove their equipment works by submitting it to an independent testing lab which will produce real evidence to show to the court that it works or does not work, and also submit a sample of the equipment to Carl and his defense team for examination and testing. You can be sure the press will be reporting the results of any testing that shows how the H3Tec can or cannot perform.

Do you really think H3Tec legal action will ever happen?
Or do you think we will continue to hear reports of their email demands and threats?

Best wishes,
J_P