Case Review: Garaware v. Techfeb
First Publication Date: 19th November 2009
In my previous post I had analyzed the claim of the patent that is alleged to have been infringed. In this post, I will follow it up by analyzing the complete specification, and commenting on the manner in which the patent specification is drafted and positioned for examination.
- Fabricating a gabion using ropes
- Fabricating a gabion using synthetic ropes. In this case I am assuming that gabions made using fibre ropes existed before this invention
- Fabricating a gabion by weaving ropes. In this case I am assuming that gabions made using ropes existed, however, they were not woven together to form a gabion (if this is the novel element, then the description should have provided more details on how the ropes are woven to form a gabion)
- Providing apertures in the gabion that is made using ropes
- Providing flip open lid in a gabion made using rope, thereby allowing filling of the gabion with stones. In this case I am assuming that gabions made using ropes existed, however, they did not have flip open lids (If this is true, then I wonder how they used to fill the gabion)