From: L
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 5:18 PM
To: RS
Cc: pk; gn; rr; WE
Subject: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f

Dear R,

In this case, I must emphasize herein that I completely isolate myself from the rest of the institute (ISSP) from the very first day, because I realized that I was entrapped (actually kidnapped) in this institute. I have never shared or imparted my ideas conceived in 2007 Beijing conference or the work completed in  with anybody else in this institute. I will NEVER consider cooperating with anyone from Cai group and their collaborators in future. If I could manage to build an independent group of mine, I will carry out research in these fields myself.  

I must tell you more backgrounds about my rejected manuscript B719277K, which actually contains three research directions. In the main body I described a novel chemical route to synthesize cation-loaded polymer nanosphere via inverse miniemulsion, using the zinc salt as both zinc source and lipophobe. It is worth mentioning that the zinc ion is in atomic length scale homogeneously distributed in the polymer nanosphere. As far as I know, we firstly in the world developed the new methodology to synthesize this kind of polymer nanosphere. One useful application is to produce metal oxide nanoparticles by pyrolysis of the polymer nanopshere, which was what I presented in the 5th chapter of my dissertation. Before I left in Jan. 2007, the composition of the manuscript titled as “Formation of ZnO Nanocrystals via Cation-Loaded Polymer Nanospheres Made in Inverse Miniemulsion” was finished. As mentioned before, I conceived new idea consisting of two parts derived from the work in during I attended a conference in Beijing in Sept. 2007. I added the new idea to the end of the manuscript and submitted it to JACS and then to your journal.
      
The people in ISSP are suspected to have stolen the ideas that I conceived in 2007 and they are even intended to smuggle my work completed in D-country, which absolutely has no relation with them. Thus, if anyone all over the world, who claims he obtained consent from me but does not show cooperation with me in both joint funds and joint publications, use the same ideas as mine in his work, his research has nothing to do with me.  
  
Finally, I am sorry to see that your sister journal JMC allowed another follow-up paper (10.1039/C0JM03475D) from Cai group very recently.

Thank you very much again for your valuable time!

Sincerely,
L  


________________________________________
From:RS
To: L
CC: pk; gn; rr; WE
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:47:03 +0000
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f
Dear L

Thank you for your email again highlighting concerns that you have over the behavior of some researchers and the publication of some papers in a number of key journals. I understand that you are frustrated but again I must re-emphasize that until such times that you are able to produce undisputable evidence about the accusations below I am unable to take this matter further. If the researchers in question are prepared to publish an addition and correction admitting some wrong doing we would of course publish this.

With regards to a retraction, publishers cannot retract articles except in the most serious cases of fraud or potential health risks. Author disputes such as this do not meet these criteria.

I am sorry, therefore, that I am unable to help on this occasion. Again I suggest that you take this up with your Head of Department or the researcher directly so as to resolve the matter to your satisfaction.

Yours sincerely

R




From:  L
Sent: 28 January 2011 02:13
To: RS
Cc: pk; gn; rr
Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f

To avoid the interception of ISSP server, a copy of the message is sent:

Dear R,

Thank you very much for your rapid reply and the greeting for the Chinese new year.
I still believe that the evidences and analysis I presented to you are enough to prove that people from Cai group together with their Korean collaborators despoiled my intellectual property.

As I emphasized before, I conceived the ideas on a conference in Beijing in Sept. 2007, as described in the email to Miss JC. About 9 months later, in 2008 two papers (Doi:10.1021/ nn8001483 and 10.1021/nn800353q) appeared in ACS Nano. The first authors of the two papers, Yue Li and Haibo Zeng are all PhD students of Prof. Cai. Moreover, Yue Li and previously-mentioned Cuncheng Li were both postdocs of Prof. S. O. Cho as well. Are these only coincidences?

The paper nn8001483 showed the first part of my ideas, i.e. applying nanolithography method such as electron irradiation on colloidal crystals. The idea was actually stated for the first time in paper adma.200702221 in Advanced Materials, in which the authors however only inserted several words to their work to describe the general idea. The paper nn8001483 is the first one that proved the idea to work. It is obviously unreasonable if you notice that the authors, except Prof. Cho, are completely different from those of paper adma.200702221. Especially, Yue Li stayed in Korea from Jun. 2005 to Oct. 2006 and then started another postdoc job from Nov. 15, 2006 in another country. He could NEVER use the funds that were only available in 2007 and even later, while he completed the work shown in paper nn8001483 in 2006 in Korea as he claimed.

The paper nn800353q showed the second part of my ideas, i.e. to produce complex nanostructure via partial decomposition of a multicomponent precursor. The authors claimed as well they were the first in the world to report the research idea. Prof. Cai explained the origin of the idea which is hard for me to believe, as you see in our previous correspondence.

Therefore, I insist that Cai group and their collaborators conspired the idea-stealing case. And I request your and your sister journals to retract the papers using my ideas from Cai group and their collaborators. I thus invite several editors of your journal to help you investigate the case.

Thank you very much again for your valuable time!  I am looking forward to your reply in future.

Best Regards,
L




On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 08:53:24 +0000 wrote:
Dear L
Thank you for your email. I have read this email thoroughly and spoken with my colleagues and whilst I can understand your frustration and disappointment unless you can obtain undisputable evidence that a fraud has occurred or that the scientist in question is prepared to publish an addition and correction there is nothing I can do. I know this must be frustrating but we as a publisher, must remain impartial until such evidence is submitted. As I have mentioned before I suggest you take this up with the researchers in question or may be speak with your head of department about this. I am sorry not to be of more help on this occasion and wish you luck in the near future.

Wishing you a Happy New Year in the Year of the Rabbit.

Best wishes
R

From:L
Sent: 24 January 2011 02:34
To: RS

Subject: Re: RE: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f

Dear Dr. RS,

I wish to supplement some information about the idea-stealing case. As I stated before, my idea embodies two parts: the first part is to apply nanolithography method such as electron irradiation on colloidal crystals. The idea was actually carried out and proven to work for the first time in the paper (Doi: 10.1021/nn8001483) published by ACS Nano. The first author, Dr. Yue Li, claimed in public that the work shown in this paper was completed in 2006 in Korea, which means he owned the idea earlier than my inspiration in the Beijing conference in 2007. His resume proved that he stayed in Korea from Jun. 2005 to Oct. 2006 and then moved to another country to start another postdoc job. However, the foundation presented in the paper was comprised of KOSEF (2008-00393) from korean government, Anhui NSFC (070414199), 973 project  (2006CB300402) and NFSC (50601026 and 50671100) from China. It is obviously illogical and unreasonable. He could by no means use funds available one or two years later. Even the funds from China applied in 2006 were normally granted in the autumn and only available in 2007.  

I thus believe that Cai group do not own the ideas of any of the previously- mentioned papers. It is evidently that people from Cai group conspired with their Korean collaborators from Cho group grabbed my scientific property via underhand manners and wanted to cover the facts that I was the founder of this research area. And I wish you would carry out action on the case, such as retracting the questioned papers.

Thank you very much again for your valuable time!  I look forward to your reply soon.

Best Regards,
L

On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 16:10:55 +0100 wrote:
Dear L

Thank you for your email concerning the alleged stealing of your research ideas. After reading your email unfortunately I still feel that there is nothing I can do here. This is a matter that you must come to an agreement with with the author in question. If they are willing to publish an addition and correction I would of course be able to publish this but at this stage there is no further action that I am able to take.I therefore wish you luck in resolving this matter and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further concerns.

Yours sincerely
R  

________________________________________
From: L
Sent: 28 April 2010 01:34
To: RS
Cc: ad; PSW
Subject: Re: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f

Dear Dr. RS,

I think that I should tell you the recent development of this idea-stealing case. On Feb. 24 of this year, the first day we came back from the Spring Festival, Prof. Weiping Cai called and invited me to his office for a talk in private. He showed that he had known being accused from some certain channels. He tried to clarify the imputation, saying that his group in late 2006 made out the results, corresponding to the second part of my idea, in an experimental accident. He told me that one of his students splashed several drops of acid onto his sample and later he discovered the new nanostructure as hollow nanosphere, which was presented in a manuscript and published in ACS Nano (nn800353q) in 2008. He even witnessed that Prof. S. O. Cho also began to deal with ‘colloidal crystal’, when Cho visited his group in 2006 and discussed the unpublished results, corresponding to the first part of my idea, with him. However, I have checked Prof. Cho’s full publication list and found no paper respecting colloidal crystal published before the conference in Beijing. Prof. Cho’s first-time mention on the concept was in his paper (adma.200702221) in Advanced Material in 2008.I described Prof. Cai the whole process how his student got to know my ideas and how I accused his group to the journals as well, as I wrote to you in the last emails. Nonetheless, I could by no means accept his explanations on the origin of accused papers, in that no proof or any material was shown to me to back up his statements. Since the group insisted to publish follow-up papers using the synthesis procedures derived from my ideas, I have to declare here once more that I have hitherto no connection in science with any of these researchers.Therefore, I wish you would reexamine the issue and determine whether deprivation of intellectual property exists in this case. The journal editors of the mentioned paper are listed as recipients of this email, so that I need not repeat the same content one by one.T

hank you very much again for your valuable time.

Sincerely,
L    

From: RS
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 1:16 AM
To: L
Subject: RE: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f
Dear Dr L

Thank you again for your email and apologies for the delay in responding to you. Firstly I would like to again emphasise that I can understand you are disappointed and frustrated with this issue. Concerning the problems around the research ideas that the researcher from your institute allegedly stole from you at a conference, again I must apologise and say really there is nothing I can do. Although the work may have been carried out when you were in D-country, I have no way of knowing whether the authors in question were not also thinking of this at this time, apart from your comments to the contrary. I suggest that if you would like to take this further you speak with seniors Professors in your institute or discuss the problems directly with the researcher in question. Obviously if they were to submit a correction saying that you should have been included on the paper or acknowledged then we would be able to publish this. Otherwise at this stage I do not feel as though I can take the issue any further.I am sorry that I am unable to help on this occasion.

Best wishes
RS

________________________________________
From:L
Sent: 04 February 2010 08:18
To: RS

Subject: Re: RE: Accusation on paper b816751f
Importance: High
Dear Dr. RS,

I should acknowledge you for replying my last email very quickly. Concerning the opinions you have given for the accusation, I would like to add some points.

First, I think the origin of the mentioned research idea is unambiguous. It is derived naturally from my previous work carried out in MPI-Polymer as I have indicated in detail in writing to your journal more than two years ago. And all the publications showing these ideas from the accused authors was presented approximately half an year later than my manuscript submission. The institute that I am staying at is mediocre among the Chinese institutes. Never any substantial original work was generated from it in its 25 years of history. Therefore, it is reasonable for me to doubt that my scientific property was grabbed by these authors via underhand manners.

Second, once the attribution of the ideas is confirmed, you have quite a few choices to treat the dispute. For example, you may require the authors to make an erratum, or add precise citations, or even retract the paper like you applied on many similar cases before.

Moreover, when you mentioned "colleague" to define the relation of the accused authors with me, it is proper if you mean we are working in the same institution. However, I have hitherto neither discussed any scientific problem nor jointly published any results with any of these researchers, so we are rather neighbors than partners.  

I wish your journal would take measures to evince the true genesis of the questioned ideas.

Sincerely,
L

Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:48:14 +0000:
Dear Dr L  

Thank you for your recent email detailed below concerning some serious issues you have with a group at your university recently. I have read the email and the details carefully and also spoken with my Publisher with respect to your accusations. On careful consideration we feel that there is nothing we can do at this time. In particular, we feel that although proper attribution of ideas may not have been given on this occasion, as a publisher we are not in a position to judge or referee any dispute as we are not in possession of all the facts. Furthermore, even with all the facts it would be impossible for us to make a decision here. As this is a dispute between you and colleagues at the same institute it may be more appropriate to discuss this with key people at your faculty.I am sorry I could not be of more help on this occasion.

Yours sincerely
RS

________________________________________
From: L
Sent: 21 January 2010 04:57
To: CC (shared)
Subject: Accusation on paper b816751f
Importance: High

Dear Editors of Chemical Communications,

My name is G L. I am currently an associate researcher in the Institute of Solid State Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. I wish to report that some authors from the institute I am now working at published one paper in your journal, titled as ¡°One-pot synthesis of nanotube-based hierarchical copper silicate hollow spheres¡± (10.1039/b816751f), using an idea that does not belong to the authors themselves.

The idea was derived from my PhD work completed in  from Oct. 2003 to Dec. 2006. In the 5th chapter of my dissertation, I presented a novel method to prepare metal oxide nanoparticles via a cation-loaded polymer nanosphere, which is pre-synthesized by miniemulsion polymerization. And In about one year after graduation I found that the cation-loaded prepolymer could be used as precursor as well to prepare metal-oxide-nanoparticle / polymer-hollow-sphere core/shell complex nanostructure using the technology of electron irradiation.

I conceived this new idea during I participated the 6th international conference on Material Processing for Properties and Performance in Beijing. On the morning of Sept. 14, 2007, Prof. Sung Oh Cho from Korea gave a talk about preparation of macroporous polymer material by electron irradiation in this conference. I was among the audience. His talk inspired me that electron irradiation may be used in my work. So I asked Dr. Cuncheng Li, who was a Chinese postdoc of Prof. Cho and sitting by me, the cost to build a setup of electron irradiation. Dr. Li told me that he was a PhD student of Prof. Weiping Cai, the director of Institute that I am currently working at. He showed great interests in my work and inquired many details of my research plan. I told him my idea in general. In that afternoon, he looked for me and invited me to take a photo together.

I arranged my previous experimental results soon after the conference and submitted the manuscript with the title ¡°Formation of ZnO Nanocrystals via Cation-Loaded Polymer Nanospheres Made in Inverse Miniemulsion¡± to Journal of the American Chemical Society (No. JA077917J) on Oct. 18, 2007. At the end of the manuscript, I especially point out that the future work could be done to prepare complex nanostructure via electron irradiation using the cation-loaded prepolymer as precursor. Unfortunately, the paper was rejected. Then I submitted the manuscript to YOUR JOURNAL Chemical Communication (No. B719277K) again on Dec. 13, 2007. It was rejected too. In answer to the request of Miss Jackie Cockrill, the Publishing Assistant of Royal Society of Chemistry, about the necessity of urgent publication of my work, I emphasized that ¡°Very recently, we also found that our cation-loaded polymer nanospheres could be used as precursor for preparation of metal-oxide-nanoparticle/polymer-hollow-sphere core/shell nanostructure by employing electron irradiation. And by introduction of the technologies for colloidal crystal preparation such as vertical cell lifting, we can prepare new type of photonic crystals based on the work described in this manuscript. Therefore, we believe this work has paved the road to a new research area that is worthy of further investigation.¡±

And I also pointed out the importance of my work ¡°We also believe that the paper may be of particular interest to wide range of readers of your journal such as nanoscientists, ceramists and polymer chemists.¡± Clearly, the letter shows that my idea embodies two parts: the first is to apply electron irradiation on colloidal crystals; the other is to use our cation-loaded polymer nanospheres as precursor for preparation of metal-oxide-nanoparticle/polymer-hollow-sphere core/shell nanostructure, the essence of which is to produce complex nanostructure via partial decomposition of a multicomponent precursor.

Prof. Weiping Cai, who is a coauthor of the accused paper b816751f, together with Prof. Cho group produced several papers, for example, paper adma.200702221 in Advanced Materials and nn8001483 in ACS Nano employing the first part. I have accused them to the editor of the respective journals on idea-stealing.

Prof. Cai¡¯s group alone used the second part to have published several papers. The first one is presented in ACS Nano (DOI: 10.1021/ nn800353q) with the title¡± ZnO-Based Hollow Nanoparticles by Selective Etching¡±. The authors claimed they were the first to achieve ¡°ZnO-based HNPs (hollow nanoparticles), including pure ZnO, Au/ZnO, Pt/ZnO, and Au/Pt/ZnO HNPs with diameter below 50 nm and shell thickness below 6 nm¡±. And they named this kind of structure as ¡®nanocage¡¯ in a follow-up paper published in JPCC (DOI: 10.1021/jp807309s). The above-mentioned paper b816751f is another derivative of my idea, which Prof. Cai shared with his colleague Prof. Wang.

Therefore, I wish your journal would investigate the origin of this paper to see if there is any scientific misconduct. I am looking forward to receiving a formal reply from you in the near future.

My dissertation is downloadable readily online at: http://xxxxxx/urn/resolver.pl?urn=urn:nbn:xxxis:77-12xxx or http://edoc.xxxxx/xxx076. The attached are the manuscript (No. JA077917J) and the email to Miss JC.

Thank you very much for your valuable time! If you need any further material, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
L

--
FROM 211.86.159.*