|
By Joseph Newman - Inventor
The
following is now a long-over due response to the NBS Test
originally conducted on Joseph Newman's motor/generator.
[Actually this response was written at the time of its the
original testing --- buy many did (and do) not know of this
response.]
Following
the dismissal of the findings of the court-appointed Special
Master, (a former U.S. Commissioner of the Patent Office
[with "impeccable credentials" according to Judge Jackson
& nominated as Special Master by the Patent Office]
who said that the "evidence was overwhelming" that the Newman
motor/generator worked), Federal Judge Jackson (who appointed
the Special Master) ignored his own Special Master's findings
and imposed upon Joseph Newman a fee of $11,000.00 for the
Special Master's Report. (Judge Jackson [of Microsoft
case fame] was the federal judge hearing the case brought
by Joseph Newman against the Patent Office.)
Judge
Jackson then remanded the case BACK to the Patent Office
--- Joseph Newman's judicial adversary --- for further action.
It was then recommended by the Patent Office that the NBS
formally test Joseph Newman's invention. Under the
original NBS test conditions, Judge Jackson 1) refused to
order the NBS to prepare a testing program in advance of
delivery of the energy machine to the NBS, 2) refused to
permit Joseph Newman the right to have an expert present
for testing, 3) stated that the test results would be issued
in secret to Judge Jackson who said in the court record
that "it (the results) will be held under seal until we
determine that it ought to be exhibited to the public.",
and 4) gave the NBS an open-ended period of testing.
On behalf
of Joseph Newman, attorney John Flannery filed a WRIT OF
MANDAEMUS with the U.S. Court of Appeals, seeking to reverse
Judge Jackson's unfair testing conditions in favor of those
open testing procedures originally proposed by Joseph Newman.
On January
13, 1986, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
issued a court order upholding Joseph Newman's WRIT OF MANDAEMUS
against Judge Jackson. The higher court sternly rebuked
Jackson for ordering "highly irregular" testing procedures
that denied Joseph Newman the "fundamental fairness" guaranteed
him by the Federal Rules. Jackson had originally ordered
Joseph Newman to surrender his energy machine of the National
Bureau of Standards so that Office might dismantle or even
destroy it. Instead, the U.S. Court of Appeals rejected
ALL of Jackson's conditions for testing and supported Joseph
Newman's position. [As it turned out, this did no
good, because Jackson/NBS/Patent Office did exactly what
they wanted to do anyway.] The higher Court criticized
Judge Jackson for authorizing the destruction of Joseph
Newman's invention and giving "no reason for barring petitioner
from observing all the tests on his device, or from knowing
in advance what tests are to be conducted (by the NBS),"
The higher Court concluded: "Such procedures are highly
irregular, and taint the evidentiary value of the test results."
SPECIFICALLY,
THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ORDERED THAT: 1) the NBS
tests be prepared in advance of the energy machine's delivery
to the NBS, 2) Joseph Newman be present for testing as well
as have an expert on his behalf, 3) the energy machine could
not be dismantled or destroyed without Joseph Newman's consent,
4) the NBS would have 30 days AND NO MORE to test the energy
machine, and 5) the results would be issued openly and publicly
to all parties.
However,
after Joseph Newman delivered his energy machine prototype
to the NBS on January 24, 1986, the following happened:
During the authorized and original 30-day test period (from
January 24, 1986 to February 24, 1986) the NBS did not conduct
a SINGLE test! The Patent Office and the NBS asked
the Court of Appeals to change its mind and let the NBS
dismantle and destroy the energy machine. On February
12, 1986, for the second time, the Court of Appeals said
"NO: The NBS's representative, Dr. Hebner, has not attested
to his inability to test the device, or that its structure
is concealed, or that a test program cannot be reasonably
conducted to ascertain whether the device performs as disclosed
in the patent application and "on reconconsideration, we
affirm the prior order."
The
NBS still refused the test the energy machine and to run
a single test unless they were permitted to destroy the
invention. They told the Court of Appeals BEFORE they
ran the test that Joseph Newman's invention was a hoax!
(Hardly the comment of an "unbiased" testing agency.)
The NBS then offered dozens of excuses --- each of which
Joseph Newman anwswered --- in an effort to run the (30
day) clock while they waited for permission to destroy the
energy machine, e.g., the NBS insisted on communicating
by mail, rather than by telephone. In another instance,
the NBS required Joseph Newman to travel 1,000 miles from
Mississippi to Maryland to move a single wire a single inch.
Apparently the wire had come loose while the machine was
in the possession of the NBS. Joseph Newman flew to
Maryland and reconnected the loose wire, but the NBS still
refused to test the energy machine or even tell Joseph Newman
when or how they would test it.
During
the 1,000 mile trip to connect the wire by moving it one
inch, an event occurred WHICH WOULD HAVE GREAT SIGNIFICANCE
LATER ON. The approximately 135-lb energy machine
delivered to the NBS would --- if not restricted --- "pump"
back-emf into the battery pack and thus proceed to overcharge
and damage the batteries by shorting them out internally.
Normally, Joseph Newman placed 4-foot fluorescent bulbs
in the circuit to act as a "release valve" to reduce this
back-emf into the batteries. Since it was inconvenient
to carry 4-foot bulbs to the NBS offices in Maryland the
day Joseph Newwman traveled there from Mississippi to reconnect
in several minutes the loose wire, Joseph Newman simply
grounded the energy machine to shunt away the back-emf and
prevent it from damaging the batteries.
What
is most ironic is that NBS officials saw Joseph Newman GROUND
the energy machine and they ASSUMED that he ALWAYS grounded
it --- even for testing! The NBS officials were not
interested in mastering Joseph Newman's technical process
and understanding the principles involved. Instead --- like
"monkey see, monkey do" --- they later grounded the energy
machine during their secret testing of the confiscated energy
machine (see below). This action would have important
ramifications with respect to the validity of the actual
NBS test. [It should be added that Joseph Newman has
NO intention of "educating the NBS personnel." They
were supposed to be the experts; Joseph Newman's attitude
was, "Let's see what the 'experts' do."] Moreover, before
the NBS ran any tests, Joseph Newman's attorney sent the
NBS a NON-GROUNDED schematic of the circuit used to test
the energy machine.
And
the reader should be reminded that over five years earlier
Joseph Newman transported an 800-pound unit from Mississippi
to Maryland and asked the NBS to test the device.
[This was shortly after he had filed his original Patent
Application.] The NBS refused to even look at the
unit! In addition, since Joseph Newman has over 30 Affidavits
from physicists, electrical engineers and electrical technicians
attesting to validity of the machine while the Patent Office
had NOT ONE affidavit to the contrary, Joseph Newman's position
was that the Patent Office's refusal to grant him a patent
was groundless. ADDITIONAL HISTORICAL NOTE: early
in the application process Joseph Newman was told by a patent
office examiner "Mr. Newman, we believe that your invention
works, but your technical description is inadequate."
Joseph Newman appealed this decision and was informed by
the next higher examiner: "Mr. Newman, we believe
that your technical description is adequate, but your invention
does not work." It was at this point that Joseph Newman
initiated his lawsuit in the Federal Court against the Patent
Office.
BACK
TO THE STORY OF THE NBS TEST: Well, the "experts"
at the National Bureau of Standards did nothing during the
court-ordered-and-authorized-30-day-test-period that expired
on February 23, 1986. On Monday, 10:30AM on February
24, 1986, Joseph Newman's attorney, John Flannery, appeared
at the Maryland headquarters of the National Bureau of Standards
where the energy machine was being held. Armed guards met
John Flannery and refused to permit him to secure and return
Joseph Newman's property. Mr. Flannery was informed
that he had until 12 noon of that day to appear at an emergency
meeting in Federal Judge Jackson's courtroom. Should
Flannery fail to appear, Jackson would immediately issue
a warrant for his arrest.
Attorney
John Flannery did appear in the courtroom of Judge Thomas
Penfield Jackson by 12 noon. He was promptly informed
by Judge Jackson that the energy machine of Joseph Newman
was NO LONGER THE PROPERTY OF HIS COURT and that it was
now under the COMPLETE CONTROL of the National Bureau of
Standards and that the invention would NOT be returned to
Joseph Newman --- even after the agreed-upon 30-day NBS
test period had expired. Joseph Newman's attorney
John Flannery then asked Judge Jackson to remove himself
as the Judge in the case because of demonstrated personal
bias and prejudice. Jackson denied that he was prejudiced
and refused to tell Joseph Newman what authority permitted
the Judge to violate the Court of Appeals Order (see above).
As Joseph Newman said, "Since when in this country can a
court take away a person's property, seize it without even
a hearing and in violation of a standing order from an appellate
court? Something is very wrong here."
On March
3, 1986, as a result of the Court's questionable procedures,
Joseph Newman made an Affidavit in support of a motion to
disqualify Judge Jackson for his demonstrated bias and prejudice.
On March 7, 1986, the District Court held a status conference
to consider giving the NBS more time to test the energy
machine in violation of the original 30-day time limit authorized
by the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Immediately
before the status conference began, Jackson's law clerk
handed Joseph Newman's attorney John Flannery an order denying
Joseph Newman's motion to disqualify Judge Jackson as insufficient,
but without any discussion as to why the pleadings were
factually insufficient. Judge Jackson then held attorney
John Flannery in contempt for merely mentioning the pending
motion to disqualify him. Jackson then gave the PTO/NBS
until June 26, 1986 to test the energy machine --- 150
DAYS AFTER THE ENERGY MACHINE WAS ORIGINALLY DELIVERED.
Joseph
Newman could not financially afford to be present with counsel
and expert for the 12-hour workdays the NBS claimed they
worked each day on testing the energy machine. It
would have cost Joseph Newman over $60,000 to attend the
tests and is one of the reasons that the U.S. Court of Appeals
authorized the original 30-day test period limit.
Former PTO Commissioner Mossinghoff misappropriated $100,000
to run the unprecedented tests which were in violation of
the original order of the U.S. Court of Appeals. And
according to the Patent Office, the tests cost approximately
$75,000.00. Although Joseph Newman has the "right"
to attend the later, unauthorized tests on his now-confiscated
energy machine, it was a "right" that he could not financially
afford to exercise. Joseph Newman is not a large corporation.
He is an inventor who lives by what he invents. Worse,
the Patent Office said that they expect Joseph Newman to
reimburse the Patent Office for ALL NBS tests!
IT IS,
IN FACT, JOSEPH NEWMAN'S POSITION THAT ALL PTO/NBS/JUDGE
JACKSON ACTIONS TAKEN AFTER THE FEBRUARY 24, 1986 CONFISCATION
WITHOUT-DUE-PROCESS OF HIS PROPERTY ARE ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
As a result of this position and of the expense in attending
90 additional days of testing, Joseph Newman did NOT IN
ANY WAY wish to appear to endorse the NBS proceedings by
being present for their testing. Also, it should be
noted that BEFORE the NBS ran any tests, Joseph Newman's
attorney, John Flannery, forwarded to the NBS a schematic
of the circuit used to test the energy machine. It
plainly showed NOT to connect the energy machine to ground.
Prior
to the expected release of the National Bureau of Standards
(NBS) test (conducted by three individuals) results on June
26, 1986, Joseph Newman issued a national press release
--- sent to over 1,500 members of the press --- which predicted
that the NBS test results would be negative and that a "mockery
of justice is expected to continue in the chambers of Judge
Thomas Penfield Jackson."
On June
26, 1986, the NBS unsurprisingly said that Joseph Newman's
device did not work. Moreover, Jackson set a trial
date for December 8, 1986. (Up to this point, Jackson had
held a series of expensive hearings to determine if a trial
was warranted. Jackson refused to relieve himself
from the case due to bias, and Jackson refused to give Joseph
Newman a trial by jury. In fact, a Patent Office attorney
once told Joseph Newman's attorney, "We would hate to see
this case tried by a jury.")
It is
ironic that as a consequence of the Patent's Office disregard
of the Court of Appeals requirement that the NBS notify
Joseph Newman of what tests they intended to run, Joseph
Newman did not know how the NBS "tested" his machine until
AFTER the NBS issued its report. Consequently, Joseph Newman
discovered that the NBS DID NOT ACTUALLY TEST HIS INVENTION
AT ALL.
In one
of his press releases, Joseph Newman writes: "In his
April 9, 1984 Statutory Declaration before a Federal Court,
page 10, NBS expert Jacob Rabinow claimed the following:
'It is my opinion since Mr. Newman does not use a tightly-coupled
iron structure around his armature, that the efficiency
of his motor should be very low when used purely as a motor.'
Following the release of the June 26, 1986 NBS Report (which
has been challenged by Dr. Roger Hastings and other scientific
experts), NBS spokesman Matt Heyman boastfully stated to
the newsmedia that: 'the energy machine invention was so
inefficient that if one wanted to operate an ELECTRIC FAN,
then don't use the Newman Invention hooked to a battery,
but rather use a simple conducting wire from a battery to
a conventional motor.' The above two statements by
NBS representatives Rabinow and Heyman are ESPECIALLY IRONIC
because on July 30, 1986 --- in conjunction with his appearance
before the Senate Subcommittee Hearing --- Joseph Newman
demonstrated his latest, portable energy machine prototype
which operated as a MOTOR (without Rabinow's 'tightly-coupled
iron structure around the armature') to power a home-appliance
ELECTRIC FAN at an efficiency rate that proved the Patent
Office and the NBS dead wrong. Again."
Dr.
Roger Hastings, Senior Physicist with a major research corporation
concluded that the Patent Office's trial expert, the National
Bureau of Standards --- the preeminent national testing
laboratory --- failed to measure the energy in Joseph Newman's
energy machine although it had the energy machine for 150
days. Dr. Hastings said that the NBS simply didn't
know what they were doing. "The Court of Appeals gave the
Patent Office 30 days to test the energy machine and required
the Patent Office to tell us in advance what tests they
were going to run during the 30-day test period authorized
by the U.S. Court of Appeals," said John Flannery, Newman's
counsel. "But their expert, the NBS, kept the device
150 days and never told us what tests they were going to
run during this 30-day period," he concluded.
In his
evaluation, Dr. Hastings wrote that the NBS "results reflect
a total lack of communication between the NBS and Newman
or any other expert on Newman's technology." "If they
told us what they were doing, we might have been able to
avoid this waste of time and resources of Joseph Newman
and the taxpayers as well," said Flannery.
Dr.
Hastings said in his evaluation that the NBS allowed energy
to escape from Newman Energy Machine and then, instead of
measuring the output energy from the machine, they measured
the power consumed by resistors "placed in parallel with
the Newman motor, and called this power the output."
Dr. Hastings concluded, "The primary r.f. (radio frequency)
power was shunted to ground." As for measuring output,
Hastings said the NBS's test was "equivalent to stating
that the output of an electric motor plugged into a wall
socket is given by the power used by a light bulb in the
next room which is on a parallel circuit." "The NBS
test results came as no surprise to me," said Joseph Newman,
"I never expected that we would get a fair shake from the
Patent Office's expert. What I am surprised about
is how badly they did the job."
If the
Patent Office and the NBS had complied with the Court of
Appeals Order, Joseph Newman would have had a second opportunity
to reinforce what was already obvious from the schematic
diagram forwarded to the NBS --- that they should NOT connect
Joseph Newman's energy machine to ground. Joseph Newman
could have told the NBS that they were in error. But
since the NBS and the Patent Office failed to give Joseph
Newman any notice --- contrary to the U.S. Court of Appeals
Order --- of the tests they intended to run during the 30-day
test period authorized by the Court of Appeals, the Patent
Office and the NBS wasted Joseph Newman's resources and,
by their estimates, $75,000.00 of federal taxpayer's monies
misappropriated by former Patent Office Commissioner Mossinghoff.
The
Republican Study Committee of Congress wrote in its May
9, 1986 REPORT: "Joseph Newman has received arbitrary and
unfair treatment at the hands of the Patent Office and Judge
Jackson. Congress should act because the Executive
and Judicial branches have failed this American citizen.
In light of Congress' oversight responsibilities and the
fact that it is empowered by the Constitution to issue patents,
the fact that the preponderance of evidence is in Joseph
Newman's favor, and the fact that this invention is potentially
beneficial to hundreds of millions of people, it is totally
in order for Congress to grant Newman a patent and to allow
the American marketplace to decide the value of this invention."
SUMMATION
OF ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS:
GROUND:
The NBS shunted energy from the Newman invention to ground
without measuring and lost this energy.
RESISTORS:
The NBS measured energy spent in resistors but not in or
by Newman's invention.
Dr.
Hastings: "In the NBS testing, the Newman motor
was connected directly to ground, thus eliminating the excess
r.f. power from the system."
Dr.
Hastings: "The NBS test is equivalent to stating
that the output of an electric motor plugged into a wall
socket is given by the power used by a light bulb in the
next room which is on a parallel circuit."
Principal
points concerning deficiencies of the NBS test conducted
by three individuals:
1)
The input voltage into the energy machine was restricted.
This is exactly opposite to the Technical Process taught
by Joseph Newman who teaches that the input voltage should
be maximized and the input current should be minimized.
The three individuals at the NBS did the opposite.
2)
As Dr. Roger Hastings wrote in his statement: "In
the NBS testing, the Newman motor was connected directly
to ground." --- as a result, the excess output power was
shunted away.
3)
The NBS test did not measure the output of Newman's motor
--- instead, he says, the tests measured the output of parallel
resistors. As a result, Dr. Hastings says, "Their
measurements are therefore irrelevant to the actual functioning
of the Newman device."
4)
No attempt was made by the NBS to measure the heat generated
in the motor windings.
5)
No attempt was made by the NBS to measure the mechanical
output of the Newman motor --- only the electrical output.
Note:
Last year, the A&E Network presented a Special regarding
Joseph Newman's work and featured a discussion of the above
events which further updated the incompetent nature of the
tests performed by the NBS.
|
