|
Evidence Summaries by Topic [PDF or HTML]
M
– Main Summary – Compilation of
Overviews to Evidence Sections 1–5
1 – Battelle Misused
DOE Technical
Assistance
Program
– Withheld Gov. Research
|
Note: Click for PDF
printable version of Summary Section 1.
Synopsis: Battelle withheld DOE-TAP-funded research [software]
from the MDM version that it delivered to small business owner Pulver on 8/29/03. One
week later, Battelle executed a non-disclosure agreement [NDA] on MDM
software with Ecolabs/Neotech on 9/8/03. Battelle kept
the
working MDM version, nominated it for awards [R&D 100], and marketed it commercially.
In a 2008 declaration, Dorow produced no evidence refuting
he withheld the working version.
|
1A
– Transcript: Court Rejects Battelle Claiming Right to Deliver “Zero” under TAP
|
Synopsis: After admitting MDM software worked/functioned 3 months
before delivery to Pulver, Battelle asserted the signed agreements allowed
them to deliver “zero”, “less than a Barbie
doll”
and “unworkable product”. The judge called that
“ridiculous” and denied their dismiss motion
based on evidence Battelle withheld best-efforts
working TAP-funded MDM version from him.
|
2
– Battelle “New Code” “New
Name” Tactic to Evade Pulver’s Exclusive License
|
Note: Click for PDF
printable version of Summary Section 2.
Synopsis: After the DHS Radiation Portal Monitor Program [RPMP]
adapted 2003 MDM/PDAC to BlackBerry in 2004, Battelle called it “new code”, said “Pulver is toast”, wrote a
“NEW” invention report named “RDADS”, and filed a patent application on it
in 2005. In emails, it acknowledged
their “new code” tactic as a means to evade Pulver’s worldwide exclusive
license to derivative [follow-on] versions of MDM. A scientist expressed
concern over the emails being
subpoenaed.
[Note:
Battelle renamed MDM [Mobile Data Manager] software to “PDAC”; thus
“MDM/PDAC” ]
|
3
– Battelle Misrepresenting
DHS-RPMP Research to Court to Conceal Evidence
|
Note: Click for PDF
printable version of Summary Section 3.
Synopsis: Battelle top-secret clearance holder Dorow and
DOE-funded counsel Miller are misrepresenting RPMP research and thus
misleading the court into blocking production of smoking-gun evidence,
i.e., RPMP versions of the 2003 TAP-funded MDM software. They inaccurately state RPMP rejected
MDM/PDAC and instead funded new & different software [RDADS] irrelevant
to the case that shouldn’t be produced [concealed from examination]. Battelle & USPTO evidence & PNNL
testimony unequivocally refute these representations.
|
4 – Battelle Concealing
Commercial Investment [RDADS/MDM Venture]
from Court
|
Note: Click for PDF
printable version of Summary Section 4.
Synopsis: Documents released in Feb. 2008 by PNNL Legal, clearly
indicate that Battelle misled the court in 2006 when it denied funding
their “TagCONNECT” investment project
[IR&D
(1831)] to enhance & commercialize the RDADS software. TagCONNECT combined RDADS [PDAC/MDM] with
RFID and is very similar or identical to the technology of Hi-G-Tek
[Battelle licensee] that received a $15.5M investment from Battelle Ventures et al. in
2006-07.
|
P –
Battelle Testimony Confirming
Misrepresentations to Patent Office [USPTO]
|
Note: Click for PDF
printable version of Summary Section P.
Synopsis: Documents & testimony indicate Battelle circumvents
patent filing rules of the
US
Patent & Trademark Office [USPTO] by rewriting & renaming prior
inventions to get new “timeframes” and thereby bypass statutory
deadlines/bars [re: invention public disclosure or usage]. Evidence repeatedly confirms their 2005
"new code" tactic as an example of this, i.e., resetting MDM’s 10/1/03 statutory
deadline to 1/31/06
for the “NEW” invention RDADS.
|
5 – DOE-Funded Counsel Prior Firm Fined for Misconduct [Hid Toxicity & Crash
Evidence]
|
Note: Click for PDF
printable version of Summary Section 5.
Synopsis: That firm used tactics to withhold critical evidence
which resulted in record sanctions for misconduct [discovery abuse] from WA
Supreme Court and a federal judge.
Press articles on this misconduct are cited due to relevancy to
DOE-funded counsel’s misrepresenting Radiation Portal Monitor Project and
Battelle’s commercialization venture in order to conceal smoking-gun
evidence further implicating Battelle in misusing PNNL’s small business
Technical Assistance Program [ withholding
DOE-funded research from TAP recipients & violating False
Claims Act ].
|
L – Battelle
Litigation Fraud [Perjury] – Cost to
Taxpayers: $900K [2005-2010 only]
For more evidence and court files, please send email via bottom link
on site index.
|