University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 21

As I stated in the last blog, the current posting will contain another example of where “Kennedy” stole an invention made previously by a famous scientist.  Before getting to that particular case a little bit of digression is necessary to illustrate another “Kennedy” tactic.  That tactic is obscuring or in many cases simply omitting facts.  A prime example is work the “Kennedy” group did on the copolymerization of isobutene with β-pinene.  As it turns out, Emil Ott (of Hercules) first patented the copolymerization of isobutene with β-pinene where the solvent was ethyl chloride and the Lewis acids were BF3 and AlCl3.1  Much latter the “Kennedy” group reinvestigated copolymerization of these two monomers, the only difference being the use of EtAlCl2 and lower polymerization temperatures.2-5  In two of “Kennedy’s” books,2,5 the reader is led to believe that successful copolymerization of these two monomers had not been effected until “Kennedy” came upon the scene.  These two books appeared after a peer reviewed article3 and patent4 had been published.  The article itself is quite interesting to make note of since its title “Poly(isobutylene-co-β-Pinene) A New Sulfur Vulcanizable, Ozone Resistant Elastomer by Cationic Isomerization Copolymerization” is very significant as it is purposely worded to be misleadingThat is, this copolymer had already been disclosed almost 15 years prior to “Kennedy’s” work!

Since the latter two documents were proofed by outsiders they make mention of Ott’s prior art disclosure1 of such copolymerizations; however, without such intervention “Kennedy” apparently thought to pull a fast one (in his books) and convince the reader that he invented the copolymer.  Another very interesting fact is that in all of the aforementioned “Kennedy” references2-5 “Kennedy” puts forth another falsehood.  “Kennedy’s” lie is that EtAlCl2 gives rise to azeotropic copolymerization whereas he claims other Lewis acids (e.g., AlCl3) do notA close look at “Kennedy’s” patent4 (e.g., Tables II & III) actually demonstrates that AlCl3 (i.e., the system originally described by Ott) not only gives rise to azeotropic copolymerization but that it does so at a much higher reaction temperature than “Kennedy’s” EtAlCl2 system!  These falsehoods were accidentally discovered when I was researching terpenic resins and were first disclosed in a book chapter6 that I coauthored on the subject.  So not only was one of “Kennedy’s” first inventions at U. Akron actually made by another researcher 15 years prior but “Kennedy” mislead people to believe this invention has actual benefit over Ott’s disclosure when in fact it is less beneficial because it is more energy intensive.  It is unknown the exact amount of money wasted by U. Akron on “Kennedy’s” inventions but the author of this blog believes it well exceeds $ 1 million.

As following blog postings will show, a repetitive pattern emerges when one scratches the surface of “Kennedy” patents.  This pattern is that much of what “Kennedy” has patented is prior art (i.e., someone else invented it and disclosed it prior to “Kennedy”)A prime example is work done in 1961 by Sinn, Winter, and Tirptiz.7  Most people in the polymer science community will recognize Sinn’s name since he and Kaminsky are credited with discovering that alkylaluminoxanes are useful activators for metallocenes and ushered in a new era (i.e., single site catalysis) in the polymer science field.  In the aforementioned Sinn, Winter, and Tirpitz paper these researchers describe the cationic polymerization of styrene by initiator systems consisting of dialkylaluminum halide + hydrohalogen acid and trialkylaluminum halide + hydrohalogen acidDespite this fact, some years latter “Kennedy” was able to patent these same initiator systems for cationic polymerization while at Esso Corp!8  Interestingly, “Kennedy” comes clean about their true origin, not only in several journal articles9,10 but also in one of his books (the reader must go to the section on styrene to find this).2  Still, prior to this batch of “Kennedy” patents, “Kennedy” again mentions in both his paper and book that Russian researchers11 also previously described initiator systems based on dialkylaluminum halide + Brønsted acid for inducing cationic polymerization.  It is unknown how these “Kennedy” patents were allowed to issue when it is clear to even the most casual observer that previous researchers had already disclosed these initiator systems as being useful for effecting cationic polymerization.  As we will see in other blog postings, “Kennedy” continues this pattern; however, the most interesting topic of all is yet to come.*  That is, the mystery of “Kennedy’s” true identity and the conflicting story he provides surrounding his past…

* Please note that with the exception of my invention and that of P.V. Kurian all other instances involving “Kennedy’s” stealing of other people’s inventions and his obfuscation or complete omission of facts were inadvertently discovered during review of journal articles and/or the chemical patent literature.  It is the belief of the author of this blog that the total number of inventions stolen by “Kennedy” is in the many tens of instances.


(1) Ott, E. Terpene Resins U.S. Patent 2,373,706, 1945.

(2) Kennedy, J. P. Cationic Polymerization of Olefins: A Critical Inventory; John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1975; pp 99-100.

(3) Kennedy, J. P.; Chou, T. Poly(isobutylene-co-b-Pinene) a new Sulfur Vulcanizable, Ozone Resistant Elastomer by Cationic Isomerization Copolymerization Adv. Polym. Sci. 1976, 21, 1-39.

(4) Kennedy, J. P.; Chou, T. M. Process for the Preparation of Isobutylene/Beta-Pinene Copolymers U.S. Patent 3,923,759, 1975.

(5) Kennedy, J. P.; Marechal, E. Carbocationic Polymerization; John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1982; pp 1-510.

(6) Mathers, R. T.; Lewis, S. P. Monoterpenes as Polymerization Solvents and Monomers in Polymer Chemistry.; In Green Polymerization Methods: Renewable Starting Materials, Catalysis and Waste Reduction; Mathers, R. T., Meier, M. A. R., Eds.; Wiley-VCH: New York, 2011;  pp 91-128.

(7) Sinn, H. J.; Winter, H.; Tirpitz, W. V. Polymerisations- und Isomerisierungsaktivitat von Aluminiumtrialkyl, Alkylaluminiumhalogeniden und Ziegler-Mischkatalysatoren Makromolekulare Chemie 1961, 48, 59-71.

(8) Kennedy, J. P. Butyl Rubber Catalyst System Utilizing AlR2X with an HX Promoter U.S. Patent 3,349,065, 1967.

(9) Kennedy, J. P. Olefin Polymerizations and Copolymerizations with Aluminum Alkyl-Cocatalyst Systems. I. Co-catalysis with Bronsted Acid Systems J. Polym Sci., Part A-1 1968, 6, 3139-3150.

(10) Kennedy, J. P.; Gillham, J. K. Cationic Polymerization of Olefins with Alkylaluminum Initiators Adv. Polym. Sci. 1972, 10, 1-33.

(11) Tinyakova, E. I.; Zhuravleva, T. G.; Kurengina, T. M.; Kirikova, N. S.; Dolgoplosk, B. A. Dokl. Akad. Nauk 1962, 144, 592.

University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 20

While working on a document several months ago I recalled “Kennedy” stating, during a seminar at U. Akron, that carbon dioxide could be used as a solvent for cationic polymerization.  Use of solid carbon dioxide as an internal refrigerant in cationic polymerization dates well into the earlier 1900s;1 however, application of supercritical CO2 is relatively new.*  During a literature search I stumbled across a familiar pattern, “Kennedy” published work on cationic polymerization in supercritical CO2 at the same time that another researcher, Professor Joseph DeSimone (UNC) did as well!2,3  I dug a little deeper and found out that DeSimone had indeed published his results several months earlier (April of 1994) than “Kennedy” (May of 1994)** but “Kennedy” somehow had filed patent applications before DeSimone did.4  When I contacted DeSimone to determine if he was the true inventor he not only indicated that he was but that “Kennedy” had stolen the idea from a lecture delivered by DeSimone at U. Akron which was followed up with a personal meeting with “Kennedy” that same day!!!  It would appear DeSimone informed “Kennedy” that he was conducting cationic polymerization in supercritical CO2 during this personal meeting.  Please refer to the following email exchange with DeSimone here Re_ cationic pzn in supercritical CO2 . 

I asked DeSimone if he would pursue this but he declined to do so.  As I told him, this gutless behavior is the root cause of the rampant intellectual dishonesty plaguing the field of science today but he still shrugged off his responsibility.  Apparently his defeat by “Kennedy” was too much of an ordeal for him to confront. 

Possibly one of the most disgusting aspects of “Kennedy’s” stealing of DeSimone’s invention is the fact that he makes the following statement in reference #3.  “Our exhaustive manual and computer-aided literature and patent search, including data-bases such as RAPRA, STN International, and CAS, failed to identify a single reference concerning C+Pzn in SC·CO2 that is at temperatures higher than Tc = 31.1 °C, the critical temperature of CO2.”  Another salient point to the reader is although I entered the “Kennedy” lab only four years following publication of “Kennedy’s” work in supercritical CO2 there was little evidence that he ever possessed the proper equipment to conduct the experimental work.  A very antiquated and poorly maintained Parr reactor (ca. 200 mL capacity) was present in the laboratory but its state of disrepair and appearance make the author of this blog question as to whether actual polymerizations were ever conducted in the “Kennedy” lab in supercritical CO2.

As we progress in chronicling inventions “Kennedy” has stolen from other scientists we will eventually come to a very interesting case involving a scientist whose name is well-known to those in the polymer field.  The reader won’t need to take my word for this but instead “Kennedy” himself acknowledges that he took this invention from this particular scientist…

* This is currently the most detailed current review*** of initiator systems for cationic polymerization although other materials are forthcoming.  It also contains the first public disclosure of “Kennedy’s” attempt to falsify research data.  Please note, I’m only referencing the first couple references in context to cationic polymerization in supercritical CO2 as disclosed by DeSimone and Kennedy.

** It should be pointed out that many of “Kennedy’s” coinciding publications of either stolen or copycatted work (i.e., almost identical) were routinely published in the periodical “Polymer Bulletin” which “Kennedy” served as founding editor.  Obviously, there is no conflict of interest there.  IT IS QUITE INTERESTING TO NOTE THE “KENNEDY” EVEN COPIES DESIMONE’S USE OF THE TERMINOLOGY “TUNED” AND THAT THIS WORD IS USED IN ALMOST IDENTICAL POSITIONS (IN REGARDS TO THE STANDARD OUTLINE OF JOURNAL ARTICLES) OF PAPERS AUTHORED BY THESE TWO RESEARCHERS {SEE REFERENCE 2 (BOTTOM OF THIRD PARAGRAPH, INTRODUCTION) AND REFERENCE 3 (BOTTOM THIRD PARAGRAPH, INTRODUCTION)}!!!

*** The review by Gandini and Cheradame5 is the most exhaustive but somewhat dated.


(1) Lewis, S. P.; Mathers, R. T. Advances in Acid Mediated Polymerizations.; In Renewable Polymers, Synthesis, Technology and Processing; Vikas, M., Ed.; Wiley-VCH: New York, 2011;  pp 69-173.

(2) Clark, M. R.; DeSimone, J. M. Cationic Polymerizations in Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Polym. Prepr., Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem. 1994, 35,482-483.

(3) Pernecker, T.; Kennedy, J. P. Carbocationic polymerizations in supercritical carbon dioxide I. Exploratory experiments with isobutylene Polym. Bull. 1994, 32,537-543.

(4) Kennedy, J. P.; Pernecker, T. Carbocationic polymerizations in supercritical CO2 U.S. Patent 5,376,744, 1994.

(5) Gandini, A.; Cheradame, H. Cationic Polymerisation: Initiation Processes with Alkenyl Monomers. Adv. Polym. Sci. 1980, 34-35,1-284.

University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 19

The following example is one involving “Kennedy’s” almost exact copycatting of another researcher’s work.  If one takes a close look at the research reported by “Kennedy” they can come to a very quick conclusion of what the standard modus operandi is.  That is, conducting work almost identical to that of other investigators and/or stealing the ideas of others.*  From the foregoing blog posts it is obvious that a third track used by this individual is to falsify research data.  In regards to this latter strategy I was told that a female American student of his (who graduated around the time I was dismissed by “Kennedy” for refusing to falsify data) had in fact falsified the majority of experiments used in her dissertation.**  Subsequent blog postings will provide specific examples of ideas stolen by “Kennedy” and the copycatting aspect will only be secondary in terms of importance.

Recent “Kennedy” Copycatting Example

The area of using perfluoroarylated Lewis acid (PFLA) based initiators has been one of intense activity, especially during the 1990s up until recently.1-46  One of the early innovators in this field is Dr. Tim Shaffer of Exxon Mobil who developed a number of PFLA based initiator systems for the polymerization of isobutene (IB).  One of the initiator systems Shaffer devised was based upon the salt [Et3Si]+[B(C6F5)4] which is formed by hydride abstraction from a silane (i.e., Et3SiH) by [Ph3C]+[B(C6F5)4].40,42,43  This chemistry is well known (i.e., the driving force is formation of a stronger C-H bond from a weaker Si-H bond); however, it wasn’t until recently that such salts were shown to typically contain coordinated Et3SiH.47  Regardless, this system devised by Shaffer is one of very few initiator systems based on silanes for initiation of cationic polymerization.  Shortly after Shaffer’s disclosures (almost within the exact time frame) “Kennedy” reports an identical initiator system (i.e.,[Et3Si]+[B(C6F5)4]);15,16,36 however, in this instance [Et3Si]+[B(C6F5)4] is generated in situ via the metathesis reaction between Li[B(C6F5)4] and Et3SiCl (in this case the triethylsilylium tetrakis(pentafluorophenyborate) salt is formed along with LiCl)!!!  I can assure you that Zhengjie Pi (aka, Jack) was intimately involved in devising this system.***  Even those readers who are not trained chemists will realize the chemical identity of the initiator system reported by “Kennedy” is identical to that originally invented by Shaffer and only differ slightly in the way that the ion pair is generated.  The likelihood of “Kennedy” developing an almost identical initiator system independently and at the same time as Shaffer is about the same as the reader winning the Powerball lotto jackpot, especially given the scarcity of Si based initiator systems for cationic polymerization.****


* In later blog postings we are going to see that “Kennedy” not only has a habit of stealing ideas, but also has a habit of stealing the names of other people!

** Since this was conveyed to me by another “Kennedy” student I can only treat this as hearsay at the time of this writing.

*** It is believed that “Kennedy” had gained foreknowledge of Shaffer’s chemistry and tasked Jack Pi to develop a competing route that could be patented.   As I have mentioned several times earlier in this blog series, Jack was one of the few skilled chemists in the “Kennedy” group at that time and he was the only one who was specifically trained in silicon chemistry.  It is unknown if U. Akron filed patent applications on the copycatted invention made by “Kennedy”.  The author of this blog estimates that U. Akron has spent > $1×106 on “Kennedy’s” patents!

**** The author of this blog has invented two of the ≈ 5-6 known (i.e., reported) Si based initiator systems.  Only one of these has the author of this blog reported which is patent pending and published.48,49


(1) Baird, M. C. Polymerization of iso-butylene. US Patent 5448001, 1995.

(2) Baird, M. C. Carbocationic Alkene Polymerizations Initiated by Organotransition Metal Complexes: An Alternative, Unusual Role for Soluble Ziegler-Natta Catalysts. Chem. Rev. 2000, 100,1471-1478.

(3) Barsan, F.; Karan, A. R.; Parent, M. A.; Baird, M. C. Polymerization of Isobutylene and the Copolymerization of Isobutylene and Isoprene Initiated by the Metallocene Derivative Cp*TiMe2(µ-Me)B(C6F5)3. Macromolecules 1998, 31,8439-8447.

(4) Bochmann, M.; Dawson, D. M. The Aluminocenium Cation [AI(C5H5)2]+: A Highly Effective Initiator for the Cationic Polymerization of Isobutene. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1996, 35,2226-2228.

(5) Bochmann, M.; Garratt, S. Process for production of butyl rubber. US Patent 7041760, 2006.

(6) Bohnenpoll, M.; Ismeier, J.; Nuyken, O.; Vierle, M.; Schon, D. K.; Kuhn, F. Process for the production of highly reactive polyisobutenes. US Patent 7291758, 2007.

(7) Burns, C. T.; Shapiro, P. J.; Budzelaar, P. H. M.; Willett, R.; Vij, A. Bis(permethylcyclopentadienyl)aluminum Compounds: Precursors to [Cp*2Al]+ but Not to Cp*3Al. Organometallics 2000, 19,3361-3367.

(8) Carr, A. G.; Dawson, D. M.; Bochmann, M. Zirconocenes as Initiators for Carbocationic Isobutene Homo- and Copolymerizations. Macromolecules 1998, 31,2035-2040.

(9) Carr, A. G.; Dawson, D. M.; Bochmann, M. The [Zr(N{SiMe3}2)3]+cation as a novel initiator for carbocationic isobutene homo- and isobutene/isoprene co-polymerisations. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 1998, 19,205-207.

(10) Collins, S.; Piers, W. E.; Lewis, S. P. Polymerization of i-butane in hydrocarbon media using bis(borane) co-initiators. US Patent 7196149, 2007.

(11) Garratt, S.; Carr, A. G.; Langstein, G.; Bochmann, M. Isobutene Polymerization and Isobutene-Isoprene Copolymerization Catalyzed by Cationic Zirconocene Hydride Complexes. Macromolecules 2003, 36,4276-4287.

(12) Garratt, S.; Guerrero, A.; Hughes, D. L.; Bochmann, M. Arylzinc Complexes as New Initiator Systems for the Production of Isobutene Copolymers with High Isoprene Content. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43,2166-2169.

(13) Hijazi, A. K.; Yeong, H. Y.; Zhang, Y.; Herdtweck, E.; Nuyken, O.; Kühn, F. E. Isobutene Polymerization Using [CuII(NCMe)6]2+ with Non-Coordinating Anions as Catalysts. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2007, 28,670-675.

(14) Huber, M.; Kurek, A.; Krossing, I.; Mulhaupt, R.; Schnockel, H. [AlCp2]+: Structure, Properties and Isobutene Polymerization. Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 2009, 635,1787-1793.

(15) Jacob, S.; Pi, Z.; Kennedy, J. P. Cationic polymerizations at elevated temperatures by novel initiating systems having weakly coordinating counteranions 2. Isobutylene/isoprene copolymerizations. Polym. Bull. 1998, 41,503-510.

(16) Jacob, S.; Pi, Z.; Kennedy, J. P. Highest molecular weight polyisobutylenes and isobutylene copolymers by initiating systems having weakly coordinating counteranions. Polym. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1999, 80,495.

(17) Jianfang, C.; Lewis, S. P.; Kennedy, J. P.; Collins, S. Isobutene Polymerization Using Chelating Diboranes: Reactions of a Hindered Pyridine with Carbocations Bearing α-Protons. Macromolecules 2007, 40,7421-7424.

(18) Kennedy, J. P.; Collins, S.; Lewis, S. P. Polymerization of i-butene in hydrocarbon media using bis(borane) co-initiators. US Patent 7,202,317, 2007.

(19) Kostjuk, S. V.; Ganachaud, F. Cationic Polymerization of Styrene in Solution and Aqueous Suspension Using B(C6F5)3 as a Water-Tolerant Lewis Acid. Macromolecules 2006, 39,3110-3113.

(20) Kostjuk, S. V.; Ouardad, S.; Peruch, F.; Deffieux., A.; Absalon, C.; Puskas, J. E.; Ganachaud, F. Carbocationic Polymerization of Isoprene Co-initiated by B(C6F5)3: An Alternative Route toward Natural Rubber Polymer Analogues? Macromolecules 2011, 44,1372-1384.

(21) Kostjuk, S. V.; Radchenko, A. V.; Ganachaud, F. Controlled/Living Cationic Polymerization of p-Methoxystyrene in Solution and Aqueous Dispersion Using Tris(pentafluorophenyl)borane as a Lewis Acid: Acetonitrile Does the Job. Macromolecules 2007, 40,482-490.

(22) Kumar, K. R.; Hall, C.; Penciu, A.; Drewitt, M. J.; Mcinenly, P. J.; Baird, M. C. Isobutene Polymerization Initiated by [CP*TiMe2]+ in the Presence of a Series of Novel, Weakly Coordinating Counteranions. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2002, 40,3302-3311.

(23) Kumar, K. R.; Penciu, A.; Drewitt, M. J.; Baird, M. C. Isobutene–isoprene copolymerization initiated by [Cp*MMe2][(n-C18H37E)B(C6F5)3] (M=Ti, Hf; E=O, S) and related compounds. J. Organomet. Chem. 2004, 689,2900-2904.

(24) Langstein, G.; Bochmann, M.; Dawson, D. M. Process for the production of polyisoolefins by means of novel metallocene type initiator systems. US Patent 5703182, 1997.

(25) Langstein, G.; Bochmann, M.; Dawson, D. M.; Carr, A. G.; Commander, R. Controlled preparation of polyisoolefins at high temperatures using a new initiator system based on titanium, zirconium and hafnium cyclopentadienyl hydrides and a boron compound. DE Patent 19836663 A1, 2000.

(26) Lee, S.-J.; Shapiro, P. J.; Twamley, B. Synthesis and Characterization of [(C5Me4H)2Al]+, an Initiator for the Polymerization of Isobutene. X-ray Crystal Structures of [(C5Me4H)2Al(µ-Cl)]2 and [(C5Me4H)2Al][B(C6F5)4]. Organometallics 2006, 25,5582-5586.

(27) Lewis, S. P.Project 1. Synthesis of PIB-Silsesquioxane Stars via The Sol-Gel Process  Project 2. Solution and Aqueous Suspension/Emulsion Polymerization of Isobutylene Coinitiated by 1,2-C6F4[B(C6F5)2]2., Ph.D. Thesis, The Univ. of Akron, Diss. Abstr. Int. 2004, vol. 65, p. 770. Cf: Chem. Abs. 2004, vol. 143, p. 173195., 2004.

(28) Lewis, S. P. Heterogeneous Perfluoroaryl Substituted Lewis Acid Catalysts for Cationic Polymerizations. US Patent 8283427, 2012.

(29) Lewis, S. P.; Henderson, L.; Parvez, M. R.; Piers, W. E.; Collins, S. Aqueous Suspension Polymerization of Isobutene Initiated by 1,2-C6F4[B(C6F5)2]2. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127,46-47.

(30) Lewis, S. P.; Jianfang, C.; Collins, S.; Sciarone, T. J. J.; Henderson, L. D.; Fan, C.; Parvez, M.; Piers, W. E. Isobutene Polymerization Using Chelating Diboranes: Polymerization in Aqueous Suspension and Hydrocarbon Solution. Organometallics 2009, 28,249-263.

(31) Lewis, S. P.; Piers, W. E.; Taylor, N.; Collins, S. Isobutene Polymerization Using a Chelating Diborane Co-Initiator. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125,14686-14687.

(32) Li, Y.; Voon, L. T.; Yeong, H. Y.; Hijazi, A. K.; Radhakrishnan, N.; Köhler, K.; Voit, B.; Nuyken, O.; Kühn, F. E. Solvent-Ligated Copper(II) Complexes for the Homopolymerization of 2-Methylpropene. Chem. Eur. J. 2008, 14,7997-8003.

(33) Lin, M.; Baird, M. C. Benzyl group abstraction from Ti(CH2Ph)4 by B(C6F5)3 and [Ph3C][B(C6F5)4] to form Ziegler–Natta and carbocationic alkene polymerization initiators. J. Organomet. Chem. 2001, 619,62-73.

(34) Mathers, R. T.; Lewis, S. P. Aqueous Cationic Olefin Polymerization Using Tris(pentafluorophenyl)gallium and Aluminum. J. Polym. Sci., Part A. Polym. Chem. 2012, 50,1325-1332.

(35) Nuyken, O.; Vierle, M.; Kuhn, F. E.; Zhang, Y. Solvent-Ligated Transition Metal Complexes as Initiators for the Polymerization of Isobutene. Macromol. Symp. 2006, 236,69-77.

(36) Pi, Z.; Kennedy, J. P. Cationic Polymerizations at Elevated Temperatures by Novel Initiating Systems Having Weakly Coordinating Counteranions. 1. High Molecular Weight Polyisobutylenes, Nato Sci. Ser., Ser. E. ed.; In Ionic Polymerizations and Related Processes; Puskas, J. E., Ed.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, Neth., 1999; Vol. 359, pp 1-12.

(37) Radhakrishnan, N.; Hijazi, A. K.; Komber, H.; Voit, B.; Zschoche, S.; Kühn, F. E.; Nuyken, O.; Walter, M.; Hanefeld, P. Synthesis of Highly Reactive Polyisobutylenes Using Solvent-Ligated Manganese(II) Complexes as Catalysts. J. Polym. Sci., Part A 2007, 45,5636-5648.

(38) SaBmannshausen, J. Cationic and dicationic zirconocene compounds as initiators of carbocationic isobutene polymerization.   Dalton Trans. 2009, 9026-9032.

(39) Shaffer, T. D. Noncoordinating anions in carbocationic polymerization. Tris(pentafluorophenyl)boron as a Lewis acid catalyst.; In Cationic Polymerization; Faust, R., Shaffer, T. D., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, D.C., 1997;  pp 96-105.

(40) Shaffer, T. D. Cationic Catalysts and processes for using said catalysts. US Patent 6699938, 2004.

(41) Shaffer, T. D.; Ashbaugh, J. R. Carbocationic Polymerization with Noncoordinating Boron Gegenions. Polym. Prepr., Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem. 1996, 37,339-340.

(42) Shaffer, T. D.; Ashbaugh, J. R. Noncoordinating anions in carbocationic polymerization. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 1997, 35,329.

(43) Shaffer, T. D.; Dias, A. J.; Finkelstein, I. D.; Kurtzman, M. B. Cationic Polymerization Catalysts. US Patent 6291389, 2001.

(44) Song, X.; Thornton-Pett, M.; Bochmann, M. Synthesis, Structure, and Reactivity of (C5H4SiMe3)2Y{(µ-FC6F4)(µ-Me)B(C6F5)2}: Tight Ion Pairing in a Cationic Lanthanide Complex. Organometallics 1998, 17,1004-1006.

(45) Tse, C. J. W.; Kumar, K. R.; Drewitt, M. J.; Baird, M. C. Isobutene polymerization and copolymerization with isoprene initiated by [Cp*TiMe2]+ in the presence of a novel type of weakly coordinating counteranion. Macromol. Chem. Phys. 2004, 205,1439-1444.

(46) Vierle, M.; Zhang, Y.; Herdtweck, E.; Bohnenpoll, M.; Nuyken, O.; Kuhn, F. E. Highly Reactive Polyisobutenes Prepared with Manganese(II) Complexes as Initiators. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2003, 42,1307-1310.

(47) Nava, M.; Reed, C. A. Organometallics 2011, 30,4787-4800.

(48) Lewis, S. US Patent 2010/0273964, 2010.

(49) Liu, Q.; Mathers, R. T.; Damodaran, K.; Godugu, B.; Lewis, S. P. Greener, cleaner polymerization of isobutene. Green Materials 2013, 1,161-175.

University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 18

The next several blog postings will provide examples where Dr. “Kennedy” stole ideas from other investigators and/or students and/or published research that is almost identical to his peers within the exact same time frame.  Because I did not purposely set out to find such examples this list will be limited to about 10 instances of this pattern of behavior, each being presented in reverse chronology with “Kennedy’s” stealing of my invention (see previous blog postings) being the starting point.  On the other hand, since I do routinely discover new cases where this person has been engaged in this behavior my intention is to update this portion of the blog series in the future as time permits.  In some of these cases the reader will find the most damning admissions to such theft of other people’s ideas come from no other than “Kennedy” himself!

Circa 1999-2002

As I have described earlier in this blog series a cohort of mine, Dr. P.V. Kurian, had been assigned to work on ampiphilic networks for use in an artificial pancreas.*  These consisted of networks of a hydrophobic polymer (PIB) in conjunction with a hydrophilic polymer {e.g. polyethylene glycol (PEG)} and a third hydrophobic but oxygen permeable polymer, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS).1-6  Somewhere along the way hydrosilation was attempted as a method for linking α,ω-diallylic PIB to other polymers (e.g., α,ω-diallylic PEG) and as I recall, D5H (polypentamethylcyclopentasiloxane) was investigated as a crosslinking agent.  During these investigations it was discovered that gas was being evolved during hydrosilation effected crosslinking using Karstedt’s catalyst.  Again, no one in the “Kennedy” group with the exception of Dr. Zhengjie Pi had any real understanding of silicon chemistry (Pi’s work will be discussed in the next blog posting).  As such, Kurian discovered the origin of the mysterious gas evolution in part from the one “in lab” guide to silicon chemistry, the Gelest catalog.  Dr. Kurian subsequently conceived the idea that Pt catalyzed aqueous crosslinking of D5H would result in network polymer and he subsequently discovered that this polymer had high thermal stability.7-9  I can state these facts since not only was I privy to his work on a day to day basis but I am also the individual who witnessed the invention in his laboratory notebook.  In previous blog postings you can see Kurian’s signature witnessing ideas that I had conceived while in the “Kennedy” group.

Thus, both concept of the invention as well as reduction to practice were solely due to Kurian and not “Kennedy”.  Sometime after “Kennedy” fired me from his research group for not falsifying data on Yb(OTf)3 coinitiated aqueous polymerization of IB, Kurian approached me on his way out of U. Akron and informed me that he had found a company (based in Colorado I seem to remember) who had interest in the polymer he had invented and was able to entice them to travel to U. Akron to secure the intellectual property rights.  At that stage of the game not only did U. Akron lock him out of discussions relating to his invention but also only gave a royalty check to “Kennedy”!  Please refer to blog posting 14 of this series for a photograph of “Kennedy” accepting this royalty check which is being handed to him by the school president, Dr. Proenza with department head Newkome patting him on the back.  For those who want to do some digging I suggest looking at the following papers and patents in the references section of this blog posting.**  Unfortunately the story of Kurian is not unique nor is the manner in which he dealt with “Kennedy” either.  Several years ago I asked Kurian to come forward with this information and in typical cowardly fashion (as we shall see is dominate in the polymer community) he declined to, telling me that it was no longer of importance to him.***

‡ I use this term in the loosest possible manner in that I do not associate with cowards, bullies, thieves, liars, etc.  Unfortunately, in places such as graduate school one does not get to choose coworkers and in many instances you do not know a person’s true nature until it is tested.  I can say without exception there are less than a handful of people who I know from this institution who are not pieces of human waste.

* It should be noted that the artificial pancreas concept purportedly was conceived by another scientist(s) than “Kennedy”.  I do not have details on this; however, the savvy researcher should easily be able to produce documents that indeed show this is the case.  I’m guessing that Kurian devised much of this chemistry (i.e., the amphiphilic tripolymer network) but if he did so he never bothered to admit it to me.

** Please note, that in order to avoid copyright infringement I cannot post the actual PDFs to these documents.  Many can be obtained from the publisher {e.g., American Chemical Society (} or through search engines at patent offices such as the European Patent Office (  The latter (i.e. patents) are the easiest to obtain for the general public at no charge.

*** As Edmund Burke stated, “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”  The fact is the sciences have become exceedingly corrupted by evil people because otherwise good men and women have tucked their tail and run instead of confronting such individuals.  Such behavior not only damages the field as a whole but allows for further abuses to occur unchecked.


(1) Kennedy, J. P.; Kurian, P. Physically crosslinked amphiphilic block polyoxyalkylene-polyisobutylene networks, methods of preparation, and uses thereof U.S. Patent 6555619, 2003.

(2) Kurian, P.; Kasibhatla, B.; Daum, J.; Burns, C. A.; Moosa, M.; Rosenthal, K. S.; Kennedy, J. P. Synthesis, permeability and biocompatibility of tricomponent membranes containing polyethylene glycol, polydimethylsiloxane and polypentamethylcyclopentasiloxane domains Biomaterials 2003, 24,3493-3503.

(3) Kurian, P.; Kennedy, J. P. Synthesis and characterization of novel tri-continuous membranes consisting of hydrophilic/lipophilic/oxyphilic domains Polym. Prepr., Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem. 2001, 42,92-93.

(4) Kurian, P.; Kennedy, J. P. Novel tricontinuous membranes for immunoisolation Polym. Prepr., Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem. 2002, 43,631-632.

(5) Kurian, P.; Kennedy, J. P. Novel tricomponent membranes containing poly(ethylene glycol)/poly(pentamethylcyclopentasiloxane)/poly(dimethylsiloxane) domains J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2002, 40,1209-1217.

(6) Kurian, P.; Zschoche, S.; Kennedy, J. P. Synthesis and characterization of novel amphiphilic block copolymers Di-, Tri-, multi-, and star blocks of PEG and PIB J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2000, 38,3200-3209.

(7) Kennedy, J. P.; Kurian, P. Poly(cyclosiloxane) composition and method of synthesis thereof U.S. Patent 8344170, 2013.

(8) Kurian, P.; Kennedy, J. P. Novel cyclosiloxane-based networks Polym. Prepr., Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem. 2003, 44,33-34.

(9) Kurian, P.; Kennedy, J. P.; Kisluik, A.; Sokolov, A. Poly(pentamethylcyclopentasiloxane). I. Synthesis and characterization J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2002, 40,1285-1292.



University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 17

Once I left U. Akron it was as if a great weight had been lifted from my shoulders.  Although my ordeal does not compare in magnitude to his, I kept thinking of the immortal Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s words, “Free at last, free at last.  Thank God almighty we are free at last!”  But in reality I wasn’t fully insulated from the influence of individuals at U. Akron.  Indeed, I had struck out on my own and started a private company (Stewart’s Technologies, LLC) where I was engaged in research for hire services as well as producing small quantities of perfluoroarylated Lewis acids (PFLAs) for sale.*  Despite numerous difficulties I can say without hesitation that even the worst of times on my own were better than the best of times at U. Akron.

Around this time U. Akron sent documentation concerning the patents on which I was listed as a coinventor whereby I’d essentially assign over my interest in the patents to them (see below).  I only signed such documents with the caveat that I contested “Kennedy’s” inclusion as a coinventor on US 7,202,317 (see enclosure #3 in my letters to Ken Preston and George Moxon, both posted below).  Eventually I had raised this concern (again) directly with the director of technology transfer at U. Akron (Mr. Preston) as well as with the attorney (Mr. Moxon) of the law firm (Rotezel and Andress) handling the patent filings (see below).  Despite indicating that I was the sole inventor to U.S. 7,202,317 neither of them followed up with me on the matter, further perpetrating the fraud of “Dr. Kennedy”.  At that time Dr. Collins was still in the employment of U. Akron and had not yet admitted to the fact that indeed I not only conceived the invention but that I was responsible for its full development (please see the last document posted in blog # 16 of this blog series for his admittance of these facts).  I can only assume that Collins was in no position to challenge “Kennedy” or anyone else at U. Akron for that matter.  In fact, on reviewing the invention disclosure form that U. Akron forced me to sign (see below) in April 4, 2003 (this was for the first patent covering the polymerization system devised by Dr. Collins and Dr. Piers) it should be noticed that “Dr. Kennedy” was already listed as a coinventor despite the fact that this document actually predates my actual invention contained in US 7,202,317!  Further casting serious suspicion on his claim to inventorship is the fact that his claim to inventorship is solely verbal.  Regardless, as shown in the previous blog posting, every single document regarding this invention clearly shows it is mine as does the fact that I’m the only person to invent two additional polymerization systems that effect cationic polymerization of IB in aqueous media.

Declaration of power to U.Akron for Inventions

Letter to Ken Preston

Letter to Roetzel and Andress Moxon

Invention Disclosure Form

In an attempt to further disclose another discovery that I had made previously at U. Akron I began writing a journal article on the decomposition of carbocations paired with PFLAs by sterically hindered pyridines (SHPs).  During my stint at U. Akron I discovered that 2,6-di-t-butyl-4-methylpyridine readily consumed cumyl carbocation when the latter was paired with a PFLA derived anion and this finding was unique in that the consensus was such SHPs were too bulky to react with any electrophile other than H+ .  The only problem is that my discovery laid buried in my dissertation and not in a journal.  Most of this article is still on my website to this day; however, it was properly rejected by Dr. Collins due to lack of more thorough experimental investigations** (which I wasn’t about to return to U. Akron to conduct).  Regardless, submission of this draft spurred additional work in the Collins’ lab and I donated some of the PFLAs used in this research.***  This proved to be the final turning point for me in dealings with U. Akron as “Dr. Kennedy” was again somehow able to worm his way into a journal article that focused on my discovery.****  Unfortunately, I was in no position to prevent this from happening as I was not the lead author since the follow-up research had been conducted by a postdoc of Collins.  When this occurred I severed my ties with Collins and soon afterwards, Collins admitted that I was the sole inventor to US 7,202,317 (see last document on the previous blog posting) just prior to departing from U. Akron.

Following this formal severing of ties with Collins I’ve continued to be active in the field of cationic polymerization, now having invented two additional methods for aqueous polymerization of isobutene in addition to numerous other novel discoveries.  Still, during my studies of the patent and scientific literature I’ve stumbled across a number of interesting findings regarding “Dr. Kennedy’s” past inventorship experiences which further serve to collaborate previous blog postings concerning this individual.  These will be detailed in a future blog posting in this series…

* Sadly enough the only individuals to harass me in regards to PFLA manufacture were people from U. Akron and Northwestern University.  In the former instance Mr. Kenneth Preston of U. Akron attempted to coerce me into licensing a patent where I was listed as a coinventor.  The other instance involved an attorney for Northwestern University whom indicated was requested by no other than Tobin Marks to inform me that I had to stop selling PFLA compounds.  In both instances I politely declined their requests since the technology I was using was public domain.  The reader can only cast judgment as to the lack of integrity of these individuals and their respective institutions.

** In this article I attempted to forward a modification of the so called “complex counteranion theory” that supposedly originated from “Dr. J.P. Kennedy”.  As I will be detailing in a subsequent blog posting, a large number of inventions ascribed to this individual are in actuality “prior art” works of others (he even admits this in several publications) and it would appear that the same can be said for a number of concepts that this individual is credited for having developed.  Regardless, I have since devised my own theory that satisfactorily explains the MW-T profile behavior for cationic polymerizations.

*** As far as I can tell my donation of materials was never properly referenced in any of the three subsequent papers that were published by the Collins’ group following my departure from U. Akron.

**** This is the only journal article based on a discovery of mine where “Dr. Kennedy” was able to place his name.



University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 16

During my stay at U. Akron I became accustomed to making very detailed notes of the going-ons of individuals at this school (in my laboratory notebooks).  This necessity arose from “Kennedy’s” failed attempt to force me to falsify research data on Yb(OTf)3catalyzed aqueous polymerization of IB.  I even reference this habit of note taking in notebooks kept during my subsequent stint in the Collins lab as this practice disturbed numerous people in this research group (see P 87 & 130 Notebook 3).

P 87 Notebook 3

P 130 Notebook 3










This habit resulted in a catalog of disturbing and in some cases illegal behavior by people who worked in this department (see below).  Out of kindness I have redacted names in many instances; however, let me state for the record that should circumstances warrant it I will do an entire data dump of these documents and more.

Back to where I last let off in the previous blog.  Several unusual things happened within days of making my invention.  First, Scott tried to make excuses for including “Kennedy” as a co-inventor when he made absolutely no contribution to my invention ( see PP 146-147 Notebook 2).

P 146 Notebook 2

P 147 Notebook 2










When that approach didn’t work I was informed by Collins that I might not be able to finish developing my invention and in fact might never be able to report it (see P 155 Notebook 2 and P 1 Notebook 3)!

P 155 Notebook 2 P 1 Notebook 3

There is little doubt in my mind that this might have been a contrived strategy to prevent me from receiving any credit for discovering this form of polymerization.  I met this potential impasse with greater furor than ever.  The work pace imposed on me became quite grueling as not only did I write a 300+ page dissertation but several articles resulted from the work and I did all of the reduction to practice in addition to other related experiments.  It was not uncommon to put in 70-80 hours/week.  As a result I had conducted over 200 polymerizations alone.

While conducting experimentation, I devised a generalized theory as to how my invention operated (PP 17-18 NB 3).

PP 17-18 Notebook 3

As I refined my theory I was able to make steady improvements to yield and to MW/T profiles (P11 Notebook 3, P 20 Notebook 3, P 81 Notebook 3, P 93 Notebook 3).

P 11 Notebook 3 P 20 Notebook 3 P 81 Notebook 3 P 93 Notebook 3

Through the tenants of my theory I invented a couple new types of surfactants (P 79 NB 3) and also proposed a new idea in order to rationalize the unusual effects that sterically hindered pyridines had on carbocations when paired with weakly coordinating anions (see my dissertation and subsequent papers published by this group following my departure).

P 79 Notebook 3

During this period Scott had little to contribute in the way of helpful suggestions when it came to conducting polymerizations (see P 51 NB 3) and in fact one of his suggestions led to an accident that almost killed me (see P 59 NB 3).

P 51 Notebook 3

P 59 Notebook 3









If the long hours weren’t bad enough things were ever more taxing due to the environment at U. Akron.  The Collins lab was structured on a socialist model which ultimately meant that state of the art equipment costing many tens of thousands of dollars was never fully operational for meaningful periods of time.  Illustrative of this is the fact is that one glove box had its atmosphere compromised no less than 30 times in less than two years (see P 26 NB 3).

P 26 Notebook 3










Another example is the Grubb’s still produced solvents of such low purity I was never able to use them for my work and due to the laziness of the students assigned to this setup no less than two solvent reservoirs had been allowed to run dry (see P 87 NB 3).

P 87 Notebook 3










If one went to the trouble to clean glassware or purify reagents they had to be closely guarded as people would attempt to steal them in order to avoid working (see P 110 NB 3).  Any common use item could be expected to be filthy and most likely in disrepair (see P 126 NB 3).

P 110 Notebook 3

P 126 Notebook 3


Sexual promiscuity and related questionable interactions with students was not uncommon (see P 15 NB 3) and in some instances I saw faculty arrive to the school drunk with empty beer cans spilling from their car as they headed toward the polymer department.*

P 15 Notebook 3

Moreover, one student literally became so irrational that it is a miracle it didn’t result in another school tragedy (see P 123 NB 3, P 127 NB 3, P 128 NB 3, P 129 NB 3).**

P 123 Notebook

P 127 Notebook 3

P 128 Notebook 3

P 129 Notebook 3


Sadly enough I couldn’t even venture far from the lab without getting the brunt of the dismay and disrespect that faculty and staff held towards Collins (P 98 NB3, P 128 NB 3, P 131 NB3).  I never fully understood what the underlining causes of this hatred were but it was difficult to deal with and moreover students in the lab issued similar complaints to me.  All of this wasn’t made any better by the fact that my notes on the odd behavior of people at this school were discovered by Collins; however, on review I can vouch for the authenticity of every one of them.

P 98 Notebook 3

P 128 Notebook 3

P 131 Notebook 3










During my entire period at U. Akron I was never kept abreast of anything related to patents stemming from my inventions.  I was shutout of the entire process.  As I was approaching graduation it became apparent that I had no ability to prevent “Kennedy” from worming his way onto the patent covering my invention.  This was most apparent when I approached Dr. Newkome about this and told him all of the details behind my firing by “Kennedy”, my subsequent inventions in the Collins group, and the attempts by “Kennedy” to steal credit for my inventions.  Newkome’s advice was in some regards bittersweet.  He suggested that I could bar “Kennedy” from appearing as a coauthor on any of my publications; however, he informed me that trying to do the same on the patent application would be a futile exercise.  As such, Dr. “Kennedy’s” name is not listed as a coauthor on any publications that I was able to exercise control over (see J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2003, 125 (48), pp 14686–14687 and J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2005, 127 (1), pp 46–47).  It is for this reason that “Kennedy’s” name is not included as a co-author on any of the papers that were published during my stay at U. Akron and the only reason he is mentioned in the “acknowledgments” section is that Newkome suggested this as well, despite the fact that “Kennedy” made no contributions whatsoever.

Within about one year following my graduation Collins left U. Akron.  I’m guessing that the situation there became intolerable but I have no true insight as to what caused his departure.  Following graduation but prior to his departure I had resumed interacting with him as I wanted to publish additional papers on my findings relating to the decomposition of carbocations by sterically hindered pyridines.  A poorly constructed article on my part stimulated additional research by Collins and I contributed a sizable amount of the key reagent required to conduct this work.  But again, “Kennedy” latched onto my work.  Since I was not conducting these follow-up experiments I had no control over the author list and as a result “Kennedy’s” name appears on one of them.  Not long after that episode I realized that people at U. Akron would continue to leach off of me if the opportunity presented itself and thus I formally parted ways with Collins.  Although the reason is unknown to me, Collins finally admitted to a number of key “officials” at U. Akron that indeed I was the sole inventor for the aqueous polymerization systems for IB (see email below).  Unfortunately, none of these people took the proper actions needed to fix this injustice and credit for my invention is still improperly shared with others.  As will be shown in subsequent blog postings, despite repeated attempts on my part U. Akron employees and the law firm involved in handling this patent refused to effect the proper corrections to the names listed as inventors on this patent.  Moreover, at no time did U. Akron ever investigate “Kennedy” or take any sort of corrective action against him.

Collins email










* In one instance, myself and another student witnessed a faculty member leave the main office of the polymer science department through the front door while within seconds later his student adulteress left through the backdoor around 8-9pm one night.

** I have to note that another individual from this school later became so troublesome that I had to inform them that should I deem them to be a threat to my physical well-being I will not hesitate to use deadly-force against them.  The unwanted harassment in addition to the fact that I know this person has been on psychotropic medications at times (and since all recent mass shooters have a history of being on these drugs) were of serious concern to me.




University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 15

Before I pick up where I last left off I need to digress yet again.  If the reader looks (in part 14 of this blog series) at the initial notebook page (notebook 2, page 139) that describes my invention, the first aqueous polymerization system for IB, they will notice in the left hand margin a somewhat cryptic note.  This note reads “yet they will try to take credit” and I wrote this immediately after my advisor Scott had signed my notebook (notebook 2, page 141 {see below}) one day later, his signature thereby officially noting my invention (just not on the actual date that I conceived the invention!).  All of the other writing contained on these pages are original and were present prior to Scott’s signature which leads to an important point (and he did read them prior to signing).  That point is, Scott refused to sign the initial pages detailing my invention as they clearly demonstrate that I was indeed the sole inventor for this polymerization system.  This fact is further reinforced by documents/information that I provide in my next posting (including a full admission by one of the people listed as a co-inventor!).

Notebook 2 pp 139-141

Another side digression that I wish to make at this time concerns another method “Kennedy” used to extract ideas from students (besides the cabinetry behind his computer desk where he retained all hard copies of documents submitted to him by students).  Dr. “Kennedy” made it a habit to ask questions on examinations that required the student to devise new methods manufacture for existing materials or to submit details concerning new compositions of matter that would address a need described in the problem he set forth.  Good examples of these can be found on test questions written by “Kennedy” that appeared on comprehensive exams.  The polymer science department at U. Akron kept copies of all of these examinations on hand and thus it should be relatively easy for interested readers to verify this fact (look in the late 90s to early 2000s for the following example).  Unfortunately I did not retain these but I do recall one question in particular relating to amphiphilic materials wherein “Kennedy” required the student to draw the structure of such a material and then detail its synthesis.*  As it turns out, “Kennedy” was heavily involved in the development of such materials for use in biomedical applications (e.g. artificial pancreas).  My memory is quite vivid due to the fact that my answer was nothing more than a copy of chemistry that my cohort in the “Kennedy” group was working on (and I received full credit for the question).  This was in fact the same student who had his idea (for a high temperature stable silicone polymer) stolen by “Kennedy” as I described earlier in part 14 of this blog series.

As I stated earlier, with the exception of Dr. Jack Pi, no one in “Kennedy’s” group and most especially “Kennedy” possessed much in the way of knowledge when it came to silicon chemistry.  It just so happens that this particular triblock copolymer which formed the basis for the my answer to “Kennedy’s” cumulative exam question (polyethylene oxide-polyisobutene-polyethylene oxide) was made by one of the few transformations involving silicon that was well-known in the “Kennedy” lab; that is, hydrosilation.  Although I do recall this student conducting other methods to make these materials he was involved in making networks derived from these two polymers, and one method involved hydrosilation of pentamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5H) to polyethylene oxide and polyisobutene polymers that possessed terminal unsaturations (e.g. telechelic polymers with α,ω allyl groups).  These polymers were chosen due to their biocompatibility, the fact that polyisobutene has a low glass transition temperature, and because polyethylene oxide is oxygen permeable.  All of these characteristics were deemed necessary to make an artificial pancreas.  Regardless, this student’s use of D5H in conjunction with Karstedt’s catalyst in the presence of water led to his invention (accidentally) of a highly crosslinked silicone polymer that had high thermal stability (and which “Kennedy” ultimately stole credit for).  As we will see, stealing credit for other people’s invention is a recurrent theme in “Kennedy’s” life…

* Hopefully this wasn’t in his cationic polymerization class, which appeared to have one exam.  I glanced at this and did not see the problem I’m referring to (above) listed on that particular exam.





University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 14

Before I resume my previous blog I need to make a backwards digression.  Prior to making my discovery that Holy Grail was stable to hydrolytic cleavage in excess methanol (see below) and thus readily coming to the conclusion that polymerization of IB might be feasible in the presence of water (also see below)* a former research mate from “Kennedy’s” group paid me a visit.  At this moment I won’t disclose his name; however, I will say that he (like the vast majority of people who have emerged from this research group) is a coward.  This individual (as did everyone in the “Kennedy” group and many outside students too) knew quite well that I was being shafted for no good reason and yet not a single one of these people ever bothered to report anything to the department head or president of the university.  So when this person came to visit me in a distraught state because “Kennedy” had screwed him out of royalties stemming from this student’s invention I had little pity for him.  A picture of “Kennedy” receiving a royalty check for an invention made by this student is given below (and yes, I am invoking “fair use” in that this blog expose is in part for “educational” purposes, and for the general knowledge of the public as it no doubt exposes criminal activities {it will not come down without a large counter-lawsuit and even more public exposure}).  This picture shows George Newkome (current polymer science department head the last time I checked) along with Luis Proenza (current president of U. Akron), the latter is handing “Kennedy” the royalty check for the invention made by the student.

NMR exp that shows HG stable in MeOH, notebook 2 (this notebook page records Dr. Lewis’ discovery that Holy Grail was stable to hydroxylic cleavage)

First pzn exp IB aqueous media notebook 2 (These are the first notebook pages that record Dr. Lewis’ invention on aqueous polymerization of IB.  Much more will be said concerning this and related documents pertaining to this invention in subsequent blog postings.)

Dr. “Kennedy” receiving royalty check for a student’s invention

Furthermore, I wish to add that the witness to this invention can vouch with 100 % certainty that the aforementioned student was solely responsible not only for conception of the invention, but also for its reduction to practice and additionally made arrangements for the licensee to travel to U. Akron to negotiate patent licensing!  How can I make this statement?  I am the witness who signed the laboratory notebooks of this student recording his invention and additionally I also know the basic gist of how the invention came about.  All I will say is that in “Kennedy’s” lab no one (with the exception of Dr. Jack Pi) was well-versed with silicon chemistry and much of what the remainder knew was derived from the Gelest chemical catalog!  This was in part where this student gathered the necessary information needed to devise this invention (along with careful observations of what water does when present in a hydrosilation reaction mixture containing “Karstedt’s” catalyst).

As we will see in later blog postings, this habit of “Kennedy” in stealing inventions from others is not limited to this one student.  Moreover, as I will be pointing out in future blogs the chemical literature (both patent and peer reviewed articles) is replete with examples of patents that were issued to “Kennedy” (both while at Esso Corp. and U. Akron) which contain “prior art” content and thus never qualified as being “patentable” and definitely are unoriginal.  Some of the earliest articles and patents coauthored by “Kennedy” make false claims as to the originality of the research (e.g. polymerization using alkyl Al coinitiators or copolymers of IB with β-pinene) and can be readily traced as originating from peer scientists within the polymer community at the time in question or well prior to it…

* In later blog postings I will be providing numerous additional pieces of evidence that demonstrate conclusively that indeed I am the sole inventor of the first (and actually next two) aqueous polymerization systems for IB (i.e. the only aqueous polymerization systems for this monomer).  The second of these was reported by myself and a colleague a little over one year ago and the third will be reported sometime this year.

University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 13

Note to reader:  Much of the information here is contained in my dissertation, copies of which can be found at both the science library as well as polymer science department at U. Akron.

I spent the remainder of my academic career working in the Collins’ lab.*  It was here that I actually learned the majority of my laboratory skills.  Most of these skills were not imparted by the teachings of people in this lab but instead were self-taught by reading texts such as “The Manipulation of Air-Sensitive Compounds” followed with repeated trial and error attempts to replicate what I had read.  Once I entered this research group the first task at hand was to synthesis a compound that was nicknamed “holy grail.”  This material was a perfluoroarylated chelating (i.e. bidentate) borane that has the formula 1,2-C6F4[B(C6F5)2]2 and it proved at that time to be very difficult to make (taking the better portion of one year).  During this period I made some minor improvements to the synthesis of this compound.  Several things stood out in stark contrast to my experience in “Kennedy’s” lab.

  1. Collins’ equipment was modern (please see pictures below, which only show a portion of modern pieces of equipment).
  2. Scott was well-versed in the types of manipulations that needed to be conducted and was excellent at deciphering NMR spectra.
  3. Scott was a stickler for only publishing chemistry that was replicable and I can’t ever imagine him attempting to fabricate anything.
  4. Dr. Collins also was a slave driver, and in that regard I learned to develop an even better work-ethic than I had before.

Grubb’s Still for purification of solvents.

IB being collected in a graduated tube on a specialized Schlenk line.

BBr3 being purified.

Next, I began exploration of the polymerization of IB under anhydrous conditions using “holy grail” as many analogous monodentate perfluoroarylated Lewis acids had been previously used in a similar manner.  It was not uncommon for me to spend 10-12 hour days, every day of the week working in an attempt to get my degree.  In addition to the synthesis of “holy grail” and the numerous other compounds had to be made (e.g. initiators, surfactants, etc.) just for polymerization studies, a large amount of time was devoted towards conducting modeling experiments.  During my stint in this lab I collected in excess of 1,000 NMR spectra (see picture below) and many experiments were quite time consuming (ca. 6-8 hours) where manual probe tuning between 1H and 19F nuclei had to be conducted (in addition to manual shimming) over a temperature range of -80 to 25 °C.  Although keeping up the pace I had set was difficult, for the first time at U. Akron I was making good progress towards finishing a degree.  One other thing which made this period enjoyable was that I had no further contact with “Kennedy.”

Binders of GPC data and NMR spectra collected in Collins’ lab by Dr. Lewis.

During the latter part of modeling work, in an attempt to figure out why cumyl methyl ether was not an efficient initiator with “holy grail”, I made an important discovery.  The NMR spectra afforded on reaction of cumyl methyl ether seemed to indicate an unusual decomposition reaction and in order to shed light on its mechanism the a related reaction (that of methanol with “holy grail”) was explored.  All of the modeling experiments were very difficult as moisture had to essentially non-existent. They also had to be initially conducted at low temperatures (ca. -80 °C) and were further complicated by the fact that milligram or sub-milligram quantities of reagents were always involved.  Since money was very tight and the solvent of choice (CD2Cl2) was expensive the use of stock solutions (which would have facilitated proper stoichiometry) was out of the question.  After numerous attempts to add exceedingly tiny amounts of methanol (in a controlled manner) to an NMR tube I (out of desperation) added in a huge excess.  I was just sick and tired of banging my head up against the wall spending up to 8 hours at a time trying to get the proper conditions that would placate Collins.  This act of defiance was fortuitous as something very unusual occurred.  When the amount of methanol was close to that of “holy grail” decomposition always resulted but this time when methanol was in a huge excess no decomposition happened.  I was amazed that hydrolytic cleavage of “holy grail” did not occur and seeing that the pKa of methanol is close to water I formulated what would be my very first invention, aqueous polymerization of IB.

*The end result of all my work prior to graduation was no less than 3 notebooks full of data (for Collins alone), >> 1,000 NMR spectra, and several journal articles and patents (not to mention a 300 page dissertation).

University of Akron/Professor Joseph P. Kennedy Expose, Part 12

At this point in time I thought it worthwhile to post a number of photographs taken at The University of Akron that provide additional credence to this blog series.  They say a picture is worth a thousand words, in this case “words of damnation” no doubt…

The following are pictures of “Kennedy’s” state of the art dry boxes and laboratory.  It should be obvious to the reader that this is a poor joke at being anything remotely up to date or for that matter in proper operating condition.

“Kennedy” Lab 1

“Kennedy” Dry Box 1

“Kennedy” Dry Box 2

“Kennedy” Dry Box 3

“Kennedy” Dry Box 4

“Kennedy” Dry Box 5

The following are pictures of “Kennedy’s” chemical storage.  Corrosion, leaking containers, etc. were commonplace as was improper mingling of reagents and storage methods.  Much of this mess was cleaned up prior to my departure from U. Akron by an unknown individual who appeared to show up (either retired or fired from) a local company (which the author believes was Firestone).  I’m guessing that individual had no life to speak of.

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 1

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 2

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 3

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 4

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 5

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 6

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 7

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 8

“Kennedy” Chem Storage 9

The polymer science department at U. Akron.  This is a good place to have one’s mental and physical health assaulted and ideas stolen all at the same time.

Polymer Science Bldg