Message From Michael Stram

Off topic posts are welcome in this forum!
No smear campaign, or you will be banned!

Moderator: Mike Everman

MS
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:23 pm
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: USA

Message From Michael Stram

Post by MS » Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:10 pm

I am Michael A. Stram, US inventor and holder of US Patent Number 6,216,446, "Valveless Pulse-Jet Engine With Forward Facing Intake Duct, issued April 17, 2001. I also have on file a second patent pending with the US Patent Office, which is an improvement of 6,216,446, and it is based on research since 2001. Until now, I have maintained a very low profile, choosing to follow the process, guidelines, and protocols proscribed by the US Patent Office, filing all my disclosures with the Office. As a scientist and inventor, I follow these protocols strictly. At this time, I am issuing a word of caution to any individual or company, including any foreign company, like Conception GLC in Canada, not to offer any product for sale that infringes upon my patents. I have directed my attorneys to pursue vigorously any company or individual who infringes, in any way, upon my patented technology. Even foreign companies are subject to US patent law when they offer a product for sale in the US. It is not an option; they are required to abide by US patent law and to refrain from any violation of existing patents, otherwise their products can be removed from the American marketplace. As Americans, we welcome new technology that is original and not in conflict with existing patents. I am not issuing any further information or statements at this time, other than what is published on the US Patent Office web site. Michael Stram

db
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 1:53 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: New Zealand

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by db » Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:23 pm

Hi Micheal,
Prior art exists.... the list starts with 'Marconnet' 1909;
'Schubert' 1944; 'Myers' 1946... I know that forum members could
provide many more instances.. I am sure you are relying on protection using the detail, but it hard for you to survive a challenge when the 'principle' pre-exists..
db..

pezman
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:13 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: USA

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by pezman » Thu Feb 10, 2005 11:34 pm

The Stram patent acknowledges that the engine is similar to a Gluhareff engine:
Another engine, the Gluhareff engine, specified in U.S. Pat.No. 3,093,962, handles backflow by allowing reverse pulses or shock waves caused by combustion gases to exit out the intake duct diffuser at a 90 degree angle to the axis of the combustor tube. At this angle, the exhaust gases exiting from the intake do not add to to the forward thrust of the engine, but reduce thrust by reducing pressure build-up in the engine. Although the Gluhareff invention has air scoops to realize some benefits from ram air, it is designed for mounting to, and driving helicopter blades; its bulky, long intake, mounted at 90 degrees to the combustor tube, make this engine very difficult to mount to the fuselage of an airplane.
W/ that specific acknowledgement and the public body of work behind the Gluey, it's hard to imagine that a conventional 90' gluey would fall under this patent. Also, the "handles backflow by allowing reverse pulses or shock waves caused by combustion gases to exit out the intake duct diffuser at a 90 degree angle to the axis of the combustor tube" line seems like a bit of spin. The Gluhareff patent can be read online at www.uspto.gov.

There also doesn't seem to be implication that all front aspirating valveless pulse-jets are covered by the patent. The main claim seems to to pertain specifically to the use of the

The chief novelty seems to be the orientation of the intake stack to the combustion chamber (on axis). Interestingly the Gluhareff patent does not seem to specify any limitation to the geometry in the independent claim. In addition, dependent claim (7) in Gluhareff's patent specificially mentions the right-angle geometry as a particular implementation, so he definitely demonstrates an awareness that other geometries could be used. His main interest was helicopters, so the right-angle geometry made sense for his application. Interesting that everyone since has built then that way (w/ Mr. Stram being an apparent exception).

Good luck in court guys ;)[/quote]

Bill Lubarsky
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 5:24 am
Antipspambot question: 0

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by Bill Lubarsky » Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:22 am

The Scale RC Modelermagazine had a special edition "Scale Jets"
back in 1994. An article entitled "Is this the Affordable Jet We've Been
Waiting For?" by Josh Harel features the "Hybrijet" that was at the time being manufacture and sold by Bill Brooks in Arizona. It sure looks like
Mr. Stram's design. The design was apparently patented in 1955.
The engine has been flown (but not by the author).

Bill Lubarsky

larry cottrill
Posts: 4140
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:17 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Mingo, Iowa USA
Contact:

A Word of Caution

Post by larry cottrill » Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:11 am

True, I probably know less about what's been done before than anybody else here - HOWEVER, there must be something in Mr. Stram's design and claims that is sufficiently novel to have merited a granted patent. He certainly didn't get a jet engine patent without doing a decent search; and the professionals who specialize in searches are very, very good. The search is the only part of the patent process I've ever actually had done, and I can tell you that what professional searchers can find goes way beyond anything you might imagine [unless perhaps you've tried it on your own - which I have]. The guiding rules are still that a design idea must be novel in some way, and that it must not be completely obvious. Apparently, USPTO feels that Mr Stram has satisfied those basic criteria. It is extremely difficult to invalidate properly written claims in a patent already granted!

For Viv and Luc, the good news is that while Mr Stram probably doesn't know exactly what they have developed, they CAN know precisely what he has claimed in his existing patent. Basically, all they have to do is make sure their design does not contain anything conceptually similar, or anything that could be conceptually derived from the description and claims. Of course, you need to be wary of any language that 'broadens' the scope beyond what is actually shown or described - the law generally treats such language as perfectly legitimate.

This is precisely the reason a good search [either done professionally or on your own, if you think you're up to it] is so valuable any time you believe you have a patentable design idea. It is astonishingly easy to re-invent something unlike anything you've ever seen, and still be in violation of an inventor's rights!

Of course, that leaves the problem of his application that is waiting for a patent grant, since that will have priority [time-wise] over anything Viv and Luc are working on now that might be in conflict. You have no idea what's in that one, until the patent is granted and USPTO publishes it.

I seem to remember [but your attorney should be consulted!] that the law does not prohibit developing an idea that might be in conflict with an existing patent, but only attempting to commercialize it in any way while such patent is in force. In other words, working on your invention is never patent infringement per se - but trying to market it while a conflicting patent is in force, is. [Again, I am no lawyer - better get your own!]

L Cottrill
Last edited by larry cottrill on Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Mike Everman
Posts: 4926
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:25 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: santa barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by Mike Everman » Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:11 am

Hey Michael. Welcome to our fine community. Maybe you could come to an agreement with these fine folks, and benefit from their ability to manufacture.
Defense of the patent notwithstanding, there's always a better way than "cease and desist". Actual business could be done here, instead of business for attorneys, if you all believe it's really worth something. I don't know what your situation is, but outsourcing is the name of the game, in my humble but not so inexperienced opinion.
Some here will be amazed that you can patent such a thing in the face of so much prior art and disclosure, but I have been similarly amazed at some that I have gotten, too.
More power to you, if you can look beyond the waste that a fight would be!

Again, welcome and kick off your shoes, man.
Mike
__________________________
Follow my technical science blog at: http://mikeeverman.com/
Get alerts for the above on twitter at: http://twitter.com/mikeeverman

luc
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:05 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by luc » Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:21 am

Greetings M. Stram,

With the issue posted by my partner (M. Viv Collins) in another thread, I personally decided to let all this dye by it self.

Now that you have brough our company up in this thread, and I quote ...
At this time, I am issuing a word of caution to any individual or company, including any foreign company, like Conception GLC in Canada, not to offer any product for sale that infringes upon my patents.
I am gonna speak up.

First of all, lets make all things very clear here. The engines we want to commercialize are now of public domain. For now, the real advantages we have over others, is that we (Viv and I) are the first one in 47 years and for a perticular design, could make it engine operate properly and we have decided that it is time for this engine to gain its real place on this planet.

Second, If one day our company decide to commercialize another engine design or improvement, it will be under our own intellectual property for this engine or improvements. Our self, being designers and inventors, have no need to be warn, considering we are well aware of patent regulations, US or others.

Third and as far as your "Foward intake concept" is concern, let it be nown that I have extensive expertize in jet engines. Now, I don't know about you, but as I have noticed in my numerous years in that field, that engines such as gas turbine, RAM jets, SCRAM jets, Turbo jets, pulsejets and many others, ALL HAVE FORWARD FACING INTAKES.

Now, since you seem to be well aware of "Patent Regulations", I think you are well aware, that in each patent offices, such as in Canada and US, the have law articles, such as article 11 in Canada, that permits any individual to see and read any patent applications before they are release, for a small $200.00 fee.

Furthermore, I also think you are aware that all patent CAN and COULD be subject to objections ... And even cancellations.

Now personnally, I took upon my self and it is also our company policy to let peoples be and have fun with thier little toys and paper works ... unless they come around and push. Now, let it all be clear, that if such individual decide to keep on pushing, it is better they know their stuff and shit ... Because I (WE) know ours and will bite back.

From what Viv and I have found in our work together, it is now obvious that some Patent offices have slep on the switch when issuing patents, like I feel they did with yours and Eugene's one.

M. Stram ... May I advise you to go read the "Bodine" Patent, issued in the 50's. To your own surprise and demize maybe ... You might see a FORWARD FACING INTAKE there.

I hope no one will bring this up to the USPTO.

On this ... I wish you a nice day.

Regards,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

pezman
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:13 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: USA

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by pezman » Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:23 am

The granting of a patent is no assurance that it will survive a challenge and plenty of patents get granted that would never survive a serious challenge.

Not that any of this this necessarily reflects on the defensability of the Stram patent.

Personally, I think that the post was a little on the obnoxious side. What do I care about this guy's patent? I does not seem in any way like a positive contribution to the forum.

Viv
Posts: 2158
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:35 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Normandy, France, Wales, Europe
Contact:

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by Viv » Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:55 am

Welcome to the forum Michael, glad to see you are the responsible individual for Jeremy Brown's emails and that you really did instruct him to send them, I must how ever point out that I was not at all impressed by his level of competence in delivering your message!

I would not have treated him as an incompetent or as a troll if he had behaved in a professional manner and delivered your message by post on headed paper as per the standard practice of attorneys.

Threats delivered by email from unidentified people carry no legal standing what so ever, this also applies to your posting here, I will not give any credence to your claims until I receive a properly written and delivered notice from an identifiable individual or law practice.

Conception GLC inc. is a corporation registered in Quebec province, the official language is french so any documents of legal notice or threatened legal action should be delivered in french for consideration by our notary.

Conception GLC inc. is not in breach of any published patent belonging to you, our technology and engines have been developed by us and are covered under our own patent applications, any information or techniques have come from the public domain as a basis to build our new and innovative engines.

As a company we fully respect a patentees rights and we fully respect yours, but we will not divulge our product plans or intentions, I will say however that we are going to produce and sell an inline pressure jet in the USA, your threats of legal action not withstanding we will defend our rights vigorously, the details and operating principles of this engine are held in the public domain so your patent claims regarding an inline engine with a forward facing inlet duct are mute.

If you wish to engage us in court proceedings we would of course be forced to contest your patents with USPTO on the basis of prior art not mentioned or operation principles incorrectly stated or with held.

We feel that considerable prior art exists in the public domain, some mentioned in previous posts in this thread, you have not credited Bodine for his work that explains the operation of your engines layout and was patented by him, further your claims over Eugene Gluehareff's engine are incorrect we believe.

As one experienced in the art and an expert on the pressure jet engine it is my opinion that your engine geometry does not separate it from Eugene Gluehareffs original patented engine by any degree worthy of a separate patent.

In short your engine works on exactly the same operating principals with no quantifiable benefits above and beyond what a simple geometry change would accomplish carried out by a competent engineer.

I would be more than happy to actively demonstrate this to a court or patent examiner using real engines hooked up to our analytical test stands to prove any points in question, I would also be happy to explain the exact operation of your engine along with Eugene gluehareff's engine for comparison.

I believe some one may have contacted you with certain information of a confidential nature Michael, I believe this is how we came to your attention as you seem to have in your possession information regarding our products and planed product launches that has not been released in to the public domain.

You may be required to produce that information and the persons identity at some time in the near future, please make a note of any contacts along with date and times please.

Viv
"Sometimes the lies you tell are less frightening than the loneliness you might feel if you stopped telling them" Brock Clarke

Viv's blog

Monsieur le commentaire

Mark
Posts: 10743
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:14 pm

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by Mark » Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:05 am

I've always been interested in evolution and gradations, how one thing evolves into another. If it's not too late, I would like to patent a 45 degree intake, safely inbetween Mr. Gluhareff and Mr. Stram. Then I would have a gimbaled intake that would rotate 360 degrees and of course my design would be modifiable into a gas grill for pulsejet cookery.
Boy, this is going to be a battle of the titans, and yet all this debate is a stair step of ideas all along the way from the beginning of time.
Mark
Last edited by Mark on Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Presentation is Everything

luc
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:05 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by luc » Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:13 am

Hi Larry,

Damn Larry ... I hate to go against what your are saying ... Your such a good man ... He he he.

But your wrong my friend.

It is possible to see a unrelease patent before it get publish and for a surprisingly small amout.

In Canada, you can, under law article 11, see any unreleased patent. And considering the Canadian patent office (OPIC) and USPTO work really close together, it is not a big issue. The problem is more in finding it, meaning having the right name, invention etc ... Why this ? ... Simple ... Exactly to avoid legal conflic.

Now, as for your statement on "Search". Just for you to know this, I have written my first patent last years and used a professionnal for the research. Surprisingly, it is all linked to the amount of money you are ready to put in it. For the patent I have wrote, we have dealed with 3 major patent lawyer firm and like they said " The quality of the search goes with what you want to put in it in terms of money"

Now, judging from the quality of the Emails we have received from M. Stram's supposedly layer, I would be damn scared if I was him.

Furthermore, after doing my first and entire patent (Not the search) all text and claims included, our lawyer stated that in all is experience in that field, never before, he has seen such quality of work. I still have his recommendation letter here if one day I decide to become a patent agent.

So Larry, if one day you need a patent, I will be glad to write it down for you, for 1/3 of the cost and without drinking coffee for 1/2 the time they usually charge for ... If you know what I mean.

Like Mike said I think ... Today, you can patent a damn rock and some won't even see the damn difference.

All this said, you can be sure now, that before dropping anymore patent request, we will spend a few $100.00 on those law articles and see where we are going with all this.

One more thing while I am here. A few weeks ago, someone made commercial spying attempt on our buisness and we know this personne lurks on this forum, having admited that to us.

Furthermore, and the following is my personnal opinion. Having requested a link on this forum, our money being taken and a "Link promisse" that never came, make me beleive our commercial profile has been kept low voloutarly. Maybe because we are to damn capable or dangerous for "Other" commercial site. Now we suspect fow play and this is exactly why we have decided to go on with our own forum.

Now, reading and behing part of all this bullshit, the picture gets very clear for us.

In the last months, we have been bitten a few time ... Now it is time for us to bite back and we will bite back ... HARD.

And carry on with our stuff.

Have a nice one.

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

larry cottrill
Posts: 4140
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:17 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Mingo, Iowa USA
Contact:

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by larry cottrill » Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:46 pm

Luc wrote:But you're wrong my friend.

It is possible to see an unreleased patent before it gets published and for a surprisingly small amount.
Yeah ... I used to know that - but, it has been years since I thought about patenting anything, so I have forgotten some of the details. Of course it makes perfect sense for there to be a way to see what's "in the pipeline" at the patent office.

I don't mind being wrong as long as I get set right by someone who knows what he's talking about, so nobody is misled for long by my ramblings.

Thanks.

L Cottrill

luc
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:05 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by luc » Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:06 pm

Heyyy ... No problem Larry,

Next time, I am sure I will be the one wrong ... He he he, then, you jump on my case Budy ... No problem.

Cya Bud,

Regards,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

Mike Everman
Posts: 4926
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:25 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: santa barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by Mike Everman » Fri Feb 11, 2005 3:02 pm

Luc,
I can say with almost 100% certainty that Kenneth's lack of effort getting a link up is not part of a conspiracy!

Michael,
(I suspect you're not watching anymore, but) What would possess you to patent such an obvious and indefensible thing? Really, no disrespect intended, but it seems a collossal waste of money and time. Thousands spent in the writing and filing, then sabre rattling and intent to spend thousands more attempting to prevent people from building this noisy and inefficient thing that has nothing novel at all about it.

I'd like very much to see your disclosures.

The USPTO these days is processing so many applications that the can't possibly do a decent search of prior art, it's easier to grant and play referee later. Enforcing your patent will cause you nothing but grief if it's monetary gain you're looking for.

This is slightly more than opinion, I have 9 patents of my own.
Mike
__________________________
Follow my technical science blog at: http://mikeeverman.com/
Get alerts for the above on twitter at: http://twitter.com/mikeeverman

luc
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:05 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Message From Michael Stram

Post by luc » Fri Feb 11, 2005 3:49 pm

Greetings Mike,
Luc,
I can say with almost 100% certainty that Kenneth's lack of effort getting a link up is not part of a conspiracy!
Mike, you'r one of the guys I have the most respect in and always take what you say very seriously.

But put your self in our shoes :

1) We have alsways been ready to help peoples.
2) We mostly always shared our findings with this community.
3) We have paid the money to support this site and it was very fastly taken.
4) A promisse was written down, issued to us but never fullfild.
5) Today, we still see links to sites that have a history of taking honnest peoples money and leave then waiting.
6) Since day one of our buisness, Viv and I main goals are to make all engines cheaper to get for you guys, up to the point where we even get serious headhakes just asking our self "How can we make this cheap for the guys while hearning and honnest living".
7) We have been spyed uppon.
8) We have threathned.
9) We feel, somehow, we have been let down and kept very low.
10) Don't try to convince me, that from September 2004 up to now (Almost 6 months now), the guy never had 5 minutes to do what he promissed, because I won't buy it.

Now, why all this ? ... Today, Viv and I are still very surprised of all this and also very disapointed. Up to the point where personnaly, I say to my self ... "The eck with this site, I gave my fair share here".

Let me tel you a few things Mike.

1) Today, we have ordered 10 chineese engines, without having any orders up front. We did this because this the only way to keep prices low for these engines while avoiding any Stainless Steel price increase. We did this out of our pockets, taking a calculated risk hoping to have a few customers for low price engines. If this turn to be a mistake, well ... will Ebay them and that will be the end of it. Now, how many peoples you know that have actually done such venture for this community?

2) Also, we know a place where pressure jets nose cones are advertised at $105.00 USD. With our efforts, we think we could bring this price down arround the $70.00 CDN. We could have just gone to $105.00 CDN, sit there, and it would still be better pricing, CDN dollars being cheaper. But this is not our policy. We go for the lowest possible price, while hearning an honnest living. All this, for this community.

So, like I said above ... Just put your self in our shoes and you might come to the conclusion that our suspicions are justified.

Personnaly, I am ready to quit this place, where I think somehow, it has failed us.

That is my personnal opinion,

Regards,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

Post Reply