My paper is rejected based on a wrong (I am almost certain that it is wrong) comment of a single reviewer and the content is as below
The manuscript focuses on the problem of "Some Technical Things". This problem has been solved in several papers of "Mr. X" : See, for example "This Article".
But "This Article" of "Mr. X" is totally different from what we have done, and addresses a completely different problem. I don't know how I can show my objection to this unfair review that has wasted my time for two months!
I sent an e-mail to the journal's editor but he did not respond.
Do you have any suggestions that one can do in such situations?
Here is my point of view which I could achieve by investigating some other similar cases among colleagues and friends.
It seems that some good journals that receive a huge amount of high quality papers, send all of them to the review process. After two month and based on the amount of papers they have received they decide to decline some of the papers due to publication limitations of the journal. They just can't publish all of these so they choose the best from the best. However, since the reviewers have not yet replied or are most likely to put positive comments on the paper, they reject the paper with a fake comment from an unreal reviewer! This is some how apparent from the fake comments as they do not include too much technical information, they are usually short and do not contain any reasonable point for rejecting the paper and there is only the comments of a single reviewer, while in a real review at least two reviewers are included.
I think this behaviour is unethical and unacceptable as they are trying to deceive you so that you continue sending your good papers to them! That's a shame!