I am not sure why my last post went missing for being offtopic, the thread is related to EGR's HF Free patent application and RNU is one of the parties who have objected to EGR's patent.
The reason why I have added @mallyrocks posts is due to his comments about the audio file that RNU submitted in their objection to the patent against EGR's IP.
Mallyrock advised;
You've overlooked the best part. I understand that there is a lot of evidence to absorb but just this one piece is most interesting.https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/ann-siviour-battery-anode-material-project-project-update.6661847/?post_id=63815673
D3 is a MP4 digital recording by Dorfner ANZAPLAN, see attached.This evidence, amongst the many others, shows that they have conference material which was presented in a public forum but most importantly, it pre-dates EGRs patent application lodgement date by at least 6 months. Seemly proving that ANZAPLAN independently developed their HFfree purification process well before EGR had.
If you read my post above, you will see that EGR has made reference to the audio file as it appears it confirms ANZAPLAN Dorfner process is not a HF free purification method that RNU believed it was, It also appears that this is the reason why RNU has amended its patent application to remove the presentation.
Mallyrock suggested the Dorfner presentation occurred around 6 months prior to EGR's patent application being submitted (alluding it was a HF Free method), If my interpretation is correct, the audio file details the process uses HF and it was not an HF Free method as claimed by RNU
,IMO if I am correct in my assumption, it is a massive failure by RNU not to interpret the audio file correctly.
Anyway, I stand by my earlier remarks, EGR has nothing to lose if they don't obtain the patent application, RNU on the other hand might be in some trouble if EGR obtains the approval for the 25 new and novel processes the examiner determined.
(20min delay)