Association), whose members including over 40 Chinese companies in bamboo processing industry, Nanjing Forestry University, Zhenjiang Forest College and other scientific research institutions.
wall cladding material distributors thailand This asso ciation has been analyzed the all-round information of the No. 5543197 American Patent and its family patents, and found that the No. 5543197 American Patent was filed on Feb. 18, 1994. By patent searching, we've also found that the Chinese patent (No.
how to build the least expensive wood deck 88102689.1) of 'a process of making parallel bamboo strand lumber', which was filed on May 3, 1988, is identified with the above US patent. Moreover, Forest Ministry of PRC issued PRC forest industry standards LY / T 1072 -1992 of 'Technical Qualifications of Parallel Bamboo Strand Lumber' and LY / T 1073-1992 of 'Test Method for Physical and Mechanical Performance of Parallel Bamboo Strand Lumber' on Sep.
covering a wood patio with composite foundation 9, 1992, in order to control the quality of the recomposed bamboo flooring lumber products. Ten years later, the two standards were revised and formed one standard, that is, LY / T 1072-2002 of 'Parallel Bamboo Strand Lumber',
recycled plastic overlap fence panels which was issued and came into effect on Oct. 12, 2002. Chinese enterprises therefore have used this technology to manufacture recomposed bamboo strand lumber products for over 20 years, and the recomposed bamboo strand lumber technology have been public and prior art, in which the recomposed bamboo flooring is just one of the products using this technology.
waterproofing birdcage floor Therefore, before the date Feb.18, 1994, the same invention had been public and became prior art to the above US patent, that is, the US patent has no novelty. Though having been granted patent right, an invention without novelty is an illusory patent that The No.
color guard railing pricing 5543197 American patent on which the foreign companies' threat based actually is an illusory patent and would be invalidated legally. This should be invalidated legally, in any event, according to
