In anticipation of eventual court review the following was prepared as a rough draft of petitioner's argument. (example only)
Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the court. If I could start by stating sub silentio that the petitioner is,
amicus humani generis
The question of federal law that overrules conflicting constitutional law is at issue here. This court's definition, viable v. non-viable applied to human structure, is based on an arbitrary cut-off of time imposed upon the structures development process, with full knowledge of the required time it takes for the structure to fully develop. To impose a contrived set of standards that predicts a dire repulsive outcome in the name of justice as in the case of viable v. non-viable (fetus), is an act of human betrayal performed at the highest level and foretells of a dark page in history.
The unitary energy structure of the invention is the foundation (constitution), that supports life, likewise as the U.S. Constitution that embodies this court supports life of the nation. To grind a constitution to pulp in order to piece it back to fit every whim and fancy by persuasion and privilege from those committed to profit, who would blend its essence as it were, with promise to cure diverse ills of the nation, equates to vintage wine spent to improve bad wine -- a bitter act.
The inventor set out to teach the basic function and mechanism of energy that expresses a unitary energy structure (host) to which variable structures (Fabricated Energy) attach and form a symbiotic relationship. Time is the key ingredient that allows the Fabricated Energy structure to attach to a Unitary Energy structure. Together they function as "root stock" to support a particular form of life. In this instance human. The mightiest of opposed energy structures are kept apart simply by the precision of their timed function. Whereby, two identical but opposite natures attempt to join together (what creation separates), instead share of themselves and reproduce. Opposed nature of energy expressed in the invention, also demonstrates how their precise timed separation allows fully developed assemblies of energy and matter (particles) to appear simultaneously. Thus, man sees woman and woman sees man. The slightest break in time of existence separation between opposing particles brings chaos.
The invention utilizes the variable aspect of the structure to effect the mechanics that preserve the M + E of the structure located in the PO region as defined in the drawings and specifications of the invention
The appeals court and PTO's admitted failure to understand the invention results in the court's drastic flight to use a primitive, conventional definition of "energy" rather than the otherwise detailed definition provided in the greater part of the patent application.1
The issue: The appeals court does not allow the inventor's definition, and so the nature of the invention is not understood and is rejected for want of qualified subject matter under § 101. Property rights are denied the petitioner. On the other-hand, this court also does not understand the nature of life (human) as a matter of law, yet assigns vague definition, i.e., non-viable v. viable (fetus) that goes beyond the courts constitutional jurisdiction, and so is given to a third party (physician[s] for their interpretation - and accepts the (physician[s] decision to allow or disallow the right of privacy to breach or uphold a contract as a matter of law. Here the conflict of constitutional law appears transparent.
However, regardless of any conflict of constitutional law, definitions applied by this court to what the court does not discern as a matter of law, for want of understanding, must carry the law equally. Whatever this court interprets and leaves to the physician's expertise and field of knowledge, must likewise, interpret and leave to the petitioner's expertise and field of knowledge.
On behalf of the common human reference, "ME", the petitioner comes before this court by way of invention. To beg this court, if it deems as inalienable the source and time-honored structure from which the human flows then the petitioner relents to the natural order of this court. But, if the elements of the non-viable (fetus) are found as a matter of law patentable under § 101 the petitioner request sustained justice and patent protection provided for in the statutes. Else, the petitioner by nature of the invention seeks natural recourse.
What is said of 'true' knowledge is rarely seen; though its effect sets the course of our journey. A time approaches when the human must defend its place as a species, to know that weapons of the archenemy are not common or conventional, but rather they are found in, 'Bags of Temptation' filled with promises, cures and the good life - freedom for ALL! While these twist and turns appear to make the human less the beast, they instead make the human more the parasite, until finally… the Unitary Energy Structure rids itself of the parasite and another life form takes its place. Hopefully the so-called non-viable regains its place -- redeemed.
Today's disease -- tomorrows cure.
Today's cure -- tomorrows disease.
1 The court's way to come out from under. However, the basic principles of energy hold true to any assembly of energy, i.e., Bp's' Bp's on to stars, etc., Cosmos - no less than the assembly of ME the Human, this Government -- this Court.
3The use of a third party that act as agents of the court stares in the face of the 10th Amendment Bill of Rights. Denies the person, the citizen, right to property and tools for the protection and preservation for non- medical purposes the essence of these pre life structures.
See proposal to open source the content of the Patent Application "Fabricated Energy"
Your comments are welcome:
| all rights reserved copyright 1999-2004 | contact us for more information | from our mind to yours | |
 |
|||
