CONFIRMATION OF THE DOCUMENT AS EVIDENCES
THE TEAM OF ROCKWELL AUTOMATION MUST HAVE PERCEPTION OF REALITY
BECAUSE AT THAT TIME 1999 NO ONE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT MY INVENTION THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OF USE PLC programmable logic controller - GSM MOBILE PHONE
THE TEAM OF ROCKWELL AUTOMATION MUST HAVE PERCEPTION OF REALITY
BECAUSE AT THAT TIME 1999 NO ONE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT MY INVENTION THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OF USE PLC programmable logic controller - GSM MOBILE PHONE
THE TEAM OF ROCKWELL AUTOMATION MUST HAVE PERCEPTION OF REALITY
BECAUSE AT THAT TIME 1999 NO ONE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT MY INVENTION THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OF USE PLC programmable logic controller - GSM MOBILE PHONE
THE TEAM OF ROCKWELL AUTOMATION RECEIVED FOUR PATENTS FOR ONLY PLC programmable logic controller WITHOUT GSM MOBILE PHONE
THE TEAM OF ROCKWELL AUTOMATION MUST HAVE PERCEPTION OF REALITY
BECAUSE AT THAT TIME 1999 NO ONE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT MY INVENTION THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OF USE PLC programmable logic controller- GSM MOBILE PHONE
THE TEAM OF ROCKWELL AUTOMATION MUST HAVE PERCEPTION OF REALITY
BECAUSE AT THAT TIME 1999 NO ONE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT MY INVENTION THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OF USE PLC programmable logic controller - GSM MOBILE PHONE
USA PATENT LAW 6.3.1999
US INVENTOR SAMY GHARB - ROCKWELL AUTOMATION BUSINESS
ROCKWEEL AUTOMATION BUSINESS WITH PLC programmable logic controller - GSM
MOBILE PHONE IN YEAR 2001 WITHOUT ANY PATENT FACT
PLC
Gharb v. Rockwell Automation et. al. patent lawsuit Patents in case. 6,552,654: “Security ... Mark IV" product as an all encompassing search solution for businesses ...
9rank.com/fargoautomation.comTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
Samy Gharb,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00405
Hon. Robert M. Dow, Jr.
V.
Rockwell Automation et al,
Defendants,
The second answer to the Motion of Defendants (No, 160 to 199)
Patents protect the world of inventions. In its simplest form, a patent
is a property right for an invention granted by the government to the Inventor. A patent gives the owner the right to exclude others from making, using, and selling devices that embody the claimed invention. See 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
A patent is a legal document but in a scientist’s hands it has to become a scientific document, and my US Patent cited in Scientific Publication in World intellectual property right with priority data is 6.3.1999. This is written in 130 countries.
As novelty which is not allowed to use without the permission of the patent holder,
The patent was valid and enforceable during the relevant time period,
(35 U.S.C. § 271) - (35 U.S.C § 284)
Ms Hansen and her team and the team of the Lawyeres must understand these points :-
The history of PLC
1.The theoretical concept of science to prove that PLC programmable logic controller from 1968 to 1999 in USA was in industrial Automation without GSM mobile phone,
Novelty Worldwide
2.Defining Scientific principles of the Novelty of my US Patent that is the first US patent in the world for the first PLC programmable logic controller and GSM mobile phone piority data 6.3.1999. which is not allowed to be used without the permission of the patent holder.
GSM mobile phone cannot communicate with PLC without to be ON in signal of GSM 1,800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields.
This is absolutely quite clear and simple as for reasoning and conceivable.
3.Ms Haesen has written for the second time that Mr Gharb misunderstand the scope of his patent but she has to know that I created the new Scientific revolution in the industrial Automation process with PLC – GSM mobile phone in the world with my US Patent as Worldwide Novelty .
4.Here for the last time I have to say that Ms Hansen must understand that the GSM Mobile phone need frequency to start to operate in signal (GSM 1,800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields) .That it is written in my US patent that the PLC asks GSM mobile phone to start to use GSM 1,800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields. GSM mobile phone cannot communicate with PLC without to be ON in signal of GSM 1,800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields.
5.My US patent is Worldwide Novelty. With this first PLC in the world which can communicate with GSM mobile phone.
Here is scientific revolution of PLC programmable logic controller – GSM Mobile phone dated in 6.3.1999 US Patent 6,552.654 with claim. As it is written in my US
The Function Blocks are summarized in the following table:
PLC Command Time
G Q9 Mobile telephone ON
G Q10Pin Code 1 06.00 s-01.50 s
G Q11Pin Code 2 08.00 s-01.50 s
G Q12Pin Code 3 10.00 s-01.50 s
H Q13 Pin Code 4 12.50 s-01.50 s
H Q14OK 14.00 s-01.50 s
H Q15Emergency number 16.50 s-01.50 s
H Q16 OK 18.50 s-01.50 s
I Q17Start emergency message 19.90 s-01.70 s
I Q18Mobile telephone OFF 55.5 s
6.. Ms Hansen must understand that. The GSM mobile phone systems, the most important use of broadcast information is to set up channels for one to one communication between the mobile transceiver and the base station.
7.To use GSM mobile phone you have to receive GSM frequencies from GSM mobile phone providers, for your country where is cell phone carriers operate on a signal GSM frequency, you have to pay the cost of communication every time because you use GSM 1,800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields
8. Novelty value of my US
PLC programmable logic controller and GSM mobile phone high speed in the world. After ten years still my US
9. The Lawyer of the defendant Rockwell Automation, Ms Hansen and her team. the team of Lawyeres must understand that is Novlety worldwide and must conceive that it is not allowed to be used without the permission of the patent holder.
10. The defendant Rockwell Automation and all defendant Companies are not allowed to use my US patent 6,552,654 without my permission.
11. The defendant Rockwell Automation and defendants Companies wilfully infringed 654 patent in violation of 35 U. S.C §271.
12. The defendant Rockwell Automation received four patents in USA only for PLC programmable logic controller but without any GSM mobile phone, from 1999 to 2000
US Pat No, 6,427,221
US
US
US
US Pat No, 6,427,221
The Lawyers have to be under an independent ethical duty.
13 Ms Hansen and her team must understand that at that time nobody of the team of defendant Rockwell Automation had an idea about my US Patent technology, If they had known it they would have filed a patent for PLC – GSM mobile phone and not only for patent for PLC in the year 1999.
This is absolutely quite clear and simple as for reasoning and conceivable.
14.Ms Hansen is trying to lead to falsification of the reality
15. Here for the last time I have to say that all these Lawyers in this patent process. have to stop doing manipulation of the truth and deviate from the truth.
16 All these Lawyers were not rejecting the pictures and documents which are present in the answer to the motion of defendants for business with defendant Rockwell Automation that means all defendant Companies have a contract with defendant Rockwell Automation for PLC programmable logic controller –GSM mobile phone.
17. In the last answer for the motion were Pictures of the evidence of infringement of which I became aware.
18 .Herewith and for the last time I have to say that defendant Rockwell Automation and all these defendant companies make treble damage to my US patent 654 and awards highly profit which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder.
18. Contract Law § 1-201Chairman Keith Nosbush has signed agreement
19. Defendant Mr Keith Nobusch has signed more than 5000 agreements. Here was one in October 29, 2008 - Rockwell signed a strategic partnership agreement today with the Heber Provincial Development and Reform Commission. The agreement will allow both sides to cooperate on projects that help save energy, reduce emissions, protect the environment and achieve a sustainable economy. First vice governor of Hebei
(18. U.S.C § 1001)
20.Many Lawyer try to tell the Court that the Inventor Gharb did not send the answer for the motion in rights, here is quite clear that I sent the answer to Motion to every Lawyer in right time .
21. The Court has to know about the Extrasensory perception and commemoration of the Lawyers of Rockwell Automation.
22. The products of defendant Rockwell Automation of PLC MicroLogix- with GSM mobile phone is patent infringement because in my invention I created this important step that the GSM mobile phone has to be ON by the PLC to operate on signal with GSM Frequency.
23. This is a scientific revolution of PLC programmable logic controller and GSM Mobile phone, this is my invention and US patent under the international patent law.
Lind Hansen Richard S Florsheim
24. They tried again monipulate the truth of business of. defendant Rockwell Automation.
Ms Hansen and her team are trying to lead to falsification of the reality.
25. The theoretical concept of science to prove that PLC from 1968 to 1999 in USA was in indudustral Automation without GSM mobile phone. Defining Scientific principles of the Novlety of my US Patent that is the first US patent in world for the first PLC programmable logic controller and GSM mobile phone priority data 6.3.1999.
This is absolutely quite clear and simple as for reasoning and conceivable.
26. What means Worldwide Novelty value of my US
27. What means priority data of my US
28. What means that the European patent office confirmed that I invented the new technology before Unitronics (REFERENCE EP PATENT NO, 1117572)?
35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent.
29. The defendant Rockwell Automation has infringed my US
30.Here for the last time I have to say that Ms Hansen her team all this lawyers in this process must stop deviate from the truth because this is International criminal business and International Patent process.
31.Ms Hansen and her team did not realize that the decision of the Court for the Unitronics process was not correct because my US Patent is new Scientific revolution of PLC programmable logic controller and GSM Mobile phone and the worldwide novelty after 10 years Unitronics tried to have patent for this product of PLC and GSM Mobile phone by European patent office but the Euopean patent office has confirmed that I invented this new Scientific revolution before Unitronics.
Ms Hansen and all these Lawyers must have perception to understand that this is new Scientific revolution of PLC- GSM mobile phone.
32. Here are all the statements of many grounds for the Court’s jurisdiction over Defendant Rockwell Automation with actively including infringement of the US Gharb patent 654 under 35 U S C §271 and §284.
The 654 patent was valid and enforceable during the relevant time period,
The defendant Rockwell Automation and all these defendant Companies willfully infringed 654 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C §271 (a) (b) ,during the relevant period.
33. Here is Proving willfull Infringement, defendant Rockwell Automation makes treble damage and awards highly profit for sale offer uses worldwide novelty invention which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder 36.35 U.S.C. 284.
34. The defendant Rockwell Automation has copied my protected International intellectual property which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder.
35. The defendant Rockwell Automation received four patents in USA for only PLC but without any GSM mobile phone. From 1999 to 2000( US Pat No, 6,427,221 - US US US
36.Ms Linda E.B. Hansen and all these Lawyers must realize this. At that time nobody of the team of Rockwell automation had an idea about my US Patent technology, If they had known it they would have filed a patent for PLC – GSM mobile phone and not only for patent for PLC in the year 1999.
For this point we find out that here is a International Criminal action and must stopped by the International Law.
37.To use GSM mobile phone you have to receive GSM frequencies from GSM mobile phone providers, for your country where is cell phone carriers operate on a signal GSM frequency, with phone card – phone number for pay the communication.
38. The products of the defendant Rockwell Automation of PLC with GSM mobile phone is patent infringement because in my invention I created this important step. The GSM mobile phone has to be ON by the PLC to operate on signal with GSM Frequency.
39. My US
40. If you do not have signal, 1800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields in GSM Mobile phone ON by PLC nobody will able to buy this product of Rockwell automation PLC MicroLogix . No communication will be happen.
41. Ms Hansen and all these Lawyers in this process must understand that the GSM Mobile phone need frequency to start to operate to send messages (GSM 1,800 MHz radio frequency electromagnetic fields) .That it is written in my US June 3 1999 .
42. Ms Hansen and all this Lawyers in this process must understand that the GSM mobile phone systems, the most important use of broadcast information is to set up channels for one to one communication between the mobile transceiver and the base station every time you have to pay for the communication with the registration of the phone Number of the sender.
43. You can find here that in the year 1999 defendant Rockwell Automation has a patent in
45. Here you can find that in the years 1999 to 2000 that the defendant Rockwell Automation has received four a patents in USA only for PLC programmable logic controller but without any GSM mobile phone and at that time defendant Rockwell Automation team had no Idea about Gharb new Technology. If they had known it they would have filed a patent for PLC – GSM mobile phone.
46. In my USA
47. The defendant Rockwell Automation has done this step which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder.
48. The fact is that the defendant Rockwell Automation team has stolen my invention.
49 The inventor uses PLC with GSM Mobile phone and a computer processor means [a personal computer including a CPU] for processing data; that means no one can use PC personal computer with CPU to store my invention. The team of defendant Rockwell Automation must understand that they have no permission to do the same by using PC keyboard.
Unitronics process
50. Federal Circuit 2008-1442 UNITRONICS (1989) (R"G) LTD. and UNITRONICS, INC
Here you can see that the decision of the Court was not correct.
64. You can read here how this people of Unitronics work; they wrote that Unitronics has done huge damage to my US
51. The team of Unitronics use my invention in the Automation Parking System in the City of Hoboken New Jersey. After 10 years the team of Unitronics tried to receive a patent for PLC programmable logic controller - GSM mobile phone by the European patent office but the European patent office has confirmed that I invented the new technology before Unitronics (REFERENCE EP PATENT NO, 1117572.
52. Here as follows you can see in the document from the authorized of the European patent office for observation concerning the inventor Mr Samy Garb. The team of Unitronics must have perception and realize that the European patent office confirmed that I invented this new technology before them (REFERENCE EP PATENT NO, 1117572).
35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent.
53. Ms Linda E.B. Hansen, all these Lawyer must have perception and realize this 35 U.S.C §102.
54. Ms Linda E.B. Hansen, all these Lawyers must have perception and realize this 35 U.S.C §102.
55. Ms Linda E.B. Hansen, all these Lawyers must have perception and realize this
35 U.S.C §102.
56. Unitronics has no right to use my invention or even to have a Patent for PLC – GSM mobile phone.
57..You can see here that the team of the defendant Rockwell Automation has offered for sale PLC programmable logic controller & GSM mobile phone in Automation Fair ORLANDO which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder,.Defendant Rockwell Automation have directly infringed the Claim 1 of my us Patent 654.
58..Here you can find that the team of defendant Rockwell Automation has offered for sale PLC & GSM mobile in Automation Fair ORLANDO which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder, Rockwell Automation have directly infringed the Claim 1 of US Gharb Patent 654.
59.Here you can find out that the team of Rockwell Automation has offered for sale PLC programmable logic controller & GSM mobile in Automation Fair ORLANDO which is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder. They have directly infringed the Claim 1 of US Gharb Patent 654. This is direct patent infringement because the PLC asks GSM mobile Phone to be ON to have GSM frequencies from GSM mobile phone providers and to send SMS to the service personnel phone Number. At the end GSM mobile phone has to close, that is written in my US Patent.
60. The defendant Fargo Automation business with Rockwell Automation with contract
§ 1-201
Mr McNair the Lawyer of defendant Fargo Atomation has written that the defendant not infringed my US patent. Here the answer with pictures of business with Rockwell automation.
Mr Michael Mc Nair has to look into the internet before he write his Motion .
61. Defendant Rockwell Automation and Fargo Automation willfully infringed my us patent 654 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C §271 during the relevant period.
62. The defendant Rockwell Automation and defendantFargo Automation willfully infringed 654 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C §271 during the relevant period.
63. The defendant Rockwell Automation and defendantFargo Automation willfully infringed 654 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C §271 during the relevant period.
64. The defendant Rockwell Automation and defendant Fargo Automation willfully infringed 654 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C §271 during the relevant period.
65. It is quite clear that defendant TOYOTA
TOYO for
www.matecnetworks.org/.../RSLogix/MODIFI-3a.PPT
Toyota
Project Main way Handling Systems out of Burlington enlisted D&D Automation to design and program four over/under units for engine racks and two over/under units for the rear beam racks to be used at the Toyota plant in Cambridge
Project Main way Handling Systems out of Burlington enlisted D&D Automation to design and program four over/under units for engine racks and two over/under units for the rear beam racks to be used at the Toyota plant in Cambridge
Project Execution
The operations of both types of racks are identical. A fork truck loads a full rack onto the bottom level where it is indexed forward toward the operator. The operator unloads the engines/rear beams with an overhead hoist. Once the rack is empty the scissor lift table raises and the empty rack is indexed out the top level where it is removed by the fork truck.
One main panel and one HMI was designed and built for each over under rack meeting the requirements set out in the NA-AMS. Shop testing was completed on Mainway's floor, and then commissioned on TMMCS floor in Combridge
Technology used for this project included Rockwell - CNTL Logix, Compact Logix PLC Project outcome The operator work zone envelope was contained to a minimum and production bottlenecks were eliminated. This Kaizen project was a success and Toyota
TOYO for
Mr Mallin has to see the facts. Please do stop doing manipulation process.
66. Here are Pictures as evidence and Mr Mallin has to see the facts. Please do stop doing manipulation process.
Conclusion
Ms Linda E.B. Hansen and all these Lawyers must have perception and realize that this is scientific revolution of PLC programmable logic controller – GSM Mobile phone in 6.3.1999 US
The defendant Rockwell Automation received four patents in USA for only PLC but without any GSM mobile phone. From 1999 to 2000( US Pat No, 6,427,221 - US US US
Ms Linda E.B. Hansen and all this Lawyers must realize this. At that time nobody of the team of defendant Rockwell Automation had an idea about my US Patent technology, If they had known it they would have filed a patent for PLC – GSM mobile phone and not only for patent for PLC in the year 1999.
For this point we find out here is a International Criminal action and must stopped by the International Law.
Ms Hansen and her team are trying to lead to falsification of thr reality.
The theoretical concept of science to prove that PLC from 1968 to 1999 in USA was in indudustral Automation without GSM mobile phone.
Defining Scientific principles of the Novlety of my US Patent that is the first US patent in world for the first PLC programmable logic controller and GSM mobile phone priority data 6.3.1999.
European patent office confirmed that I invented the new technology before Unitronics (REFERENCE EP PATENT NO, 1117572)?
35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent.
Ms Hansen and her team did not realize that the decision of the Court for the Unitronics process was not correct because my US Patent is new Scientific revolution of PLC programmable logic controller and GSM Mobile phone and the worldwide novelty after 10 year Unitronics tried to have patent for this product of PLC and GSM Mobile phone by European patent office but the Eupean patent office has confirmed that I invented this new Scientific revolution before Unitronics
Novelty value to my US
The team Rockwell Automation has offered for sale PLC programmable logic controller & GSM mobile phone in Automation Fair ORLANDO
You can find that in all these pictures, documents in the answer of the motion to defendant that defendant Rockwell Automation has many contracts with all these defendants companies as partner under US Contract Law § 1-201.
Defendant Chairman Keith Nosbush has signed agreement
Defendant Mr Keith Nobusch has signed more than 5000 agreements. Here was one in October 29, 2008 - Rockwell signed a strategic partnership agreement today with the Heber Provincial Development and Reform Commission. The agreement will allow both sides to cooperate on projects that help save energy, reduce emissions, protect the environment and achieve a sustainable economy. First vice governor of Hebei
Now after all this we can see that here are all the statements of many grounds for the court’s jurisdiction over Rockwell Automation with actively including infringement of the US Gharb patent 654
35 U S C §271
35 U S C §284.
§ 1-201
In the last the answer of the motion of the defendants was for business partner under US contract Law with all this defendants companies with pictures as evidence, these Lawyers did not reject that means that all this document are corrects.
All this Lawyers must stop to deviate from the truth, many Lawyers receivied the answer to the motion after that they has written that they did not received the answer of the motion.(18.U.S.C § 1001).
RELIEF SOUGHT
Wherefor I SAMY GHARB respectfully prays for judgment that:
A. Defendant Rockwell Automation and all these Defendant Companies wilfully infringed the 654 patent in violation of
35 U.S.C §271 during the relevant time period;
B. I am entitled to an award of damages under 35 U.S.C§284 from the defendants. acts of infringement during the relevant time period
In a polite request I ask the United States District Court Northern District of
Illinois to require an amount of compensation of $ US 1,000.000.000 from the defendant Mr Keith Nosbusch General Manger of the defendant Rockwell Automation and all these mentioned defendants because of Infringement of my US Patent 6,552,654 during the period from (2000 to 2007) for these huge damages to my US Patent.
Respectfully Submitted
US & International Patent Holder
SAMY GHARB
No comments:
Post a Comment