Between 2016 and 2019, the US Navy filed a series of patents describing technology that matches the observed performance of UAP craft. The core patent describes reducing a vehicle’s inertial and gravitational mass using high-frequency electromagnetic fields — producing acceleration without the force limitations imposed by normal mass. When the US Patent and Trademark Office rejected the applications as not credible, the Navy submitted an official letter defending them and stating the technologies were achievable in the near future. China was developing similar capabilities, the Navy argued. The patents were granted. The Navy’s institutional endorsement of inertial mass reduction via electromagnetic fields is now in the unclassified public record.
The Patents
Dr. Salvatore Cezar Pais is an aerospace engineer at the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) in Patuxent River, Maryland. His patents were filed as part of his official government duties — meaning the intellectual property belongs to the US Navy, and the Navy chose to pursue and defend them.
Patent US10144532B2 — “Craft Using an Inertial Mass Reduction Device” — is the primary document. It describes generating a “local quantum vacuum energy state” around a craft through high-frequency vibrations, reducing the vehicle’s effective inertial mass. A craft with reduced inertial mass obeys F=ma differently: the same thrust produces dramatically greater acceleration. This is the physics explanation for what UAP witnesses describe as instantaneous or near-instantaneous acceleration from a standing start — not a matter of more thrust, but less mass to accelerate.
The companion patents complete the engineering picture. A “Plasma Compression Fusion Device” provides the power source — compact nuclear fusion without the engineering requirements of a tokamak. A “Room Temperature Superconductor” removes the cryogenic cooling requirement that currently makes superconductor-based systems impractical for vehicle integration.
The USPTO Challenge and Navy Response
The USPTO’s initial challenge is important context: the examining body for US patents found these claims implausible enough to require a response. The Navy’s response — an official letter from the Naval Aviation Enterprise stating the technologies were “operable and enabled” and achievable “in the near future” with the caveat that China was already pursuing similar work — transformed the filing from a speculative engineering exercise into a statement of institutional position.
The Navy is not a naive organisation. It does not submit official letters to patent offices defending implausible claims as a scientific exercise. The defence of these patents implies either that the Navy has classified evidence supporting their feasibility — or that the competitive intelligence on Chinese programmes was sufficiently alarming to justify the institutional exposure of defending exotic propulsion claims in a public patent proceeding.
Sources: USPTO Patent US10144532B2 — Salvatore Cezar Pais, assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy. The Debrief — Pais patent investigation (Brett Tingley). USPTO correspondence on patent challenge and Navy response.