A response from Paul LaViolette regarding work at the patent office.

Well, I stand corrected. I received an email from Paul LaViolette yesterday, which shines some lights on the events related to his work at the Patent office. So in response to this article read the following article. Correction have been made to the previous article.

Actually this is not entirely true. I was an examiner of MRI technology mostly used in the medical field. The patents had nothing to do with energy production. In the short time I was there (less than a year) I rejected the majority of patent applications, which was customary according to our instructions from the supervisor. But did allow several that eventually went on to become patents.

The reasons for my dismissal had to do with a vast lobbying campaign orchestrated by APS lobbyists Peter Zimmerman and Robert Park whose goal was to get Tom Valone and myself kicked out of the Patent Office because we were supporters of cold fusion. Valone was in the process of organizing a new energy conference at the U.S. State Department building which happened to include one paper on cold fusion. So the whole matter became very political and viewed as a threat by the APS lobbyists who had a long history of being opposed to cold fusion. They succeeded in getting both of us fired from the Patent Office. Valone had the support of the PTO labor union legal team who fought his case for four years. He finally won and the PTO was forced to rehire him and pay all back salaries due plus give him the due increase in salary GS ratings. I was not as fortunate as I was not employed at the Patent Office long enough to be considered a permanent employee and so was not able to get labor union support. I had to fight the case on my own (self-represented), taking it before the EEOC judicial branch. The EEOC political appointee assigned my case to a judge who they knew was intensely opposed to my case (by her own admission to me) and not surprisingly, I lost. She even went so far as to block me from engaging in discovery, which is a mandatory right for the plaintiff under U.S. law.
This is all I wish to say at the moment. The details about the APS campaign against Valone and myself, about what the PTO did to us, the PTO emails which I obtained through FOIA requests, and the inequities of justice that I experienced to this time I have not spoken out about. Maybe one day I will write a book about it since the whole subject is so voluminous it can’t be described in a few paragraphs. By the way a few years after our departure from the PTO, the U.S. Navy released a classified report of their ten-year experimental study of cold fusion which gave their conclusion that cold fusion was indeed a valid phenomenon.

However, don’t believe most of what is written by the various media about my case. Most of it is incorrect or distorted. Please amend or delete the inaccuracies of your statement about the reasons for my departure from the PTO.

Sincerely,

Paul LaViolette

(Source: Email)