Buisness Line Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publicationsTuesday, Sep 04, 2007
Chennai, Sept. 3 In a press release issued by TVS Motor Company today, the company explains that Bajaj Auto had, at first, filed a complete final claim for patent for its “DTSi” technology on July 3, 2003 stating that “An improved internal combustion engine for efficient burning of lean air fuel mixture used in engines working in four-stroke principle, characterised in that said IC Engine comprising…” But, this was not the invention for which the patent was granted.
“Had they got the patent for this, which they could not have as this was, in patent law a prior art, then they could perhaps have claimed only they could use the two spark plug technology. But what happened was something else,” says TVS Motor Co.
Before the grant of patent, Bajaj Auto Ltd had to amend, and in fact amended, its complete final claim on November 5, 2004, wherein Bajaj Auto Ltd reduced its claim to “An improved internal combustion engine for efficient burning of lean air fuel mixture used in engines working in four-stroke principle, having two valves, characterised in that said IC Engine comprising….” This is critical. The patent, as granted, rests on the two valves as the distinct new feature, not on the two spark plugs.
Thus Bajaj Auto’s final claim to patent is based on ‘two valve engine’. In contrast, TVS Motor’s Internal Combustion Engine has three valves. In addition to this fundamental differential, which makes all the difference in law, each and every element of Bajaj Auto patent claim description, including ‘twin spark plugs’, rests purely on ‘prior art’. On a comparison of Bajaj Auto IC Engine with TVS Motor IC Engine, and also by applying the doctrines of all ‘element rules’ and ‘equivalence’ under Patent Law, any charge of ‘infringement’ against TVS Motors by Bajaj Auto is clearly ridiculous, says the release.
It goes on to say that the patent rights claimed by Bajaj Auto Ltd for its Internal Combustion Engine is not for ‘twin spark plugs’ per se. It is for the use of twin spark plugs in two valve engine. On the other hand, TVS Motor’s technology is a combination of its in-house developed innovative technology and uses AVL’s patented ‘3 Valves’ technology in engine.
“Had they got the patent for this, which they could not have as this was, in patent law a prior art, then they could perhaps have claimed only they could use the two spark plug technology. But what happened was something else,” says TVS Motor Co.
Before the grant of patent, Bajaj Auto Ltd had to amend, and in fact amended, its complete final claim on November 5, 2004, wherein Bajaj Auto Ltd reduced its claim to “An improved internal combustion engine for efficient burning of lean air fuel mixture used in engines working in four-stroke principle, having two valves, characterised in that said IC Engine comprising….” This is critical. The patent, as granted, rests on the two valves as the distinct new feature, not on the two spark plugs.
Thus Bajaj Auto’s final claim to patent is based on ‘two valve engine’. In contrast, TVS Motor’s Internal Combustion Engine has three valves. In addition to this fundamental differential, which makes all the difference in law, each and every element of Bajaj Auto patent claim description, including ‘twin spark plugs’, rests purely on ‘prior art’. On a comparison of Bajaj Auto IC Engine with TVS Motor IC Engine, and also by applying the doctrines of all ‘element rules’ and ‘equivalence’ under Patent Law, any charge of ‘infringement’ against TVS Motors by Bajaj Auto is clearly ridiculous, says the release.
It goes on to say that the patent rights claimed by Bajaj Auto Ltd for its Internal Combustion Engine is not for ‘twin spark plugs’ per se. It is for the use of twin spark plugs in two valve engine. On the other hand, TVS Motor’s technology is a combination of its in-house developed innovative technology and uses AVL’s patented ‘3 Valves’ technology in engine.
For any query:-
09215514435
deepakmiglani@hotmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment