Gaurav Mishra | Intellepedia

Dung Deal: Delhi High Court Remands Cattle Manure Battery Patent

Sodium-ion battery with hard carbon electrode material - Delhi High Court post-grant opposition ruling on cattle manure-derived battery patent

The Delhi High Court has set aside a post-grant revocation of a patent covering a cattle manure-derived hard carbon process for sodium-ion batteries, finding that the Deputy Controller failed to apply the mandatory five-step inventive step test. The case raises sharp questions about procedural rigour in post-grant opposition proceedings under the Patents Act, 1970.

Why Owning a Logo Doesn’t Mean Owning Its Letters – the A TO Z’ Trademark Dispute

Delhi High Court trademark infringement ruling on A TO Z vs MULTIVEIN AZ pharmaceutical marks – Alkem Laboratories v. Prevego Healthcare

Can a pharmaceutical giant claim exclusive rights over the letters ‘A’ and ‘Z’? The Delhi High Court, in Alkem Laboratories v. Prevego Healthcare, refused an interim injunction in an ‘A TO Z’ trademark dispute, holding the phrase descriptive and the rival mark non-infringing under Indian trademark law.

Design Is Not a Shield: Delhi High Court on Patent Infringement in the Packaging Industry

Patent infringement packaging India - technical blueprint of tamper-evident pail closure system stamped infringement confirmed. Delhi High Court ruling on design registration vs patent protection in Mold-Tek v. Neway Industries

In Mold-Tek Packaging Ltd v. Neway Industries Pvt. Ltd, the Delhi High Court examined two cross-appeals arising from a patent infringement dispute over tamper-evident packaging closures. The central question: can a design registration protect a product against a patent infringement claim? The court’s answer carries serious implications for the packaging industry.

Trade Dress Passing Off: Delhi HC Restrains GAINDA from Copying HARPIC, COLIN & LIZOL Get-Up

Featured image for blog post on trade dress passing off — a magnifying glass revealing two identical blue cleaning bottle silhouettes surrounded by a burst of multicolour swatches, with the text: "Can You Own a Colour? Delhi HC Says Look at the Whole Picture"

The Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction restraining Grand Chemical Works from selling cleaning products under the ‘GAINDA’ mark in trade dresses copying the distinctive get-up of Reckitt’s HARPIC, COLIN, and LIZOL brands. In this trade dress passing off case, the court had to decide whether an overall similarity in bottle shape, colour scheme, and packaging layout could overwhelm a prominently different house mark and how far a design that has expired can still live on as trade dress.

No Reasons, No Refusal – and No Absolute Bar Anymore: Bombay HC on Atomic Energy & Nuclear Patent Rejections

Radioactive hazard symbol on yellow and dark grey striped background, illustrating patent rejection atomic energy India

Must the government explain why it refuses a patent on atomic energy grounds? In Huntington Alloys Corporation v. Union of India, the Bombay High Court held that even an absolute statutory power demands a reasoned order – and the SHANTI Act 2025 has since rewritten the rules on nuclear patentability entirely.

Seeing Red: Calcutta High Court Upholds Exide’s Trade Dress Injunction Against Amaron

Red and green automotive batteries facing each other divided by a sharp line — illustrating the trade dress passing off dispute between Exide and Amaron at the Calcutta High Court.

Can a battery brand spend years telling consumers that red means Exide, and then quietly launch its own red product line? The Calcutta High Court’s Division Bench says no, upholding Exide’s interim injunction against Amaron maker Amara Raja in a significant trade dress passing off ruling.

Can Non-Use of a Trademark Fuel a Passing Off Claim? Delhi High Court Says No

An old glass syrup bottle coated in dust and cobwebs, resting on a worn wooden shelf, its peeling label stamped with a bold red "Registered" mark - symbolising a trademark left unused and forgotten

The Delhi High Court dismissed Sana Herbals’ appeal for an interim injunction against Mohsin Dehlvi and Dehlvi Remedies, holding that prior user of the NOKUF trademark by the respondents, even if followed by decades of non-use, defeats a passing off claim where goodwill never preceded the defendant’s adoption of the mark.

Patent Opposition Board Report: Can you challenge it before the final order?

A close-up of a formal legal document stamped in red with the word "PRELIMINARY," resting on a dark wooden desk. The document shows sections headed "Findings of Fact," "Conclusions of Law," and "Recommendation," with a blank date line at the bottom. A gavel is partially visible in the upper right corner.

When is a patent opposition board recommendation ripe for a writ petition, and when is it simply too soon? The Madras High Court tackled this question in a dispute between E.R. Squibb & Sons LLC and Zydus Healthcare Limited over a cancer-treatment patent, with significant implications for patent opposition board recommendation practice in India.

Breaking Beams, Breaking Records: Delhi High Court Awards ₹152 Crore in Antenna Patent Infringement Suit Against Rosenberger

Featured image for blog post on patent infringement damages in India - illustration of a cellular antenna tower contrasting symmetrical and asymmetrical beam patterns, representing Indian Patent No. 240893 upheld by the Delhi High Court in the landmark CCA v Rosenberger ruling awarding ₹152 crore in damages.

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of Indian Patent No. 240893 for asymmetrical beam antenna technology in Communication Components Antenna Inc. v. Rosenberger Hochfrequenztechnik GmbH, rejecting all revocation grounds. The court awarded ₹152 crore in patent infringement damages – could this signal a new era for patent enforcement in India?

Fair Hearing First: Delhi HC Sets Aside Patent Refusal Over New Grounds in Order

A blue wooden background with the words “drilling holes into patent refusals?” in black text, alongside an orange power drill angled toward the text.

The Delhi High Court has set aside the Controller of Patents’ refusal of a Wirtgen GMBH patent application, finding that new objections introduced for the first time in the final order – without prior notice – violated the applicant’s right to a fair hearing.