Case Reviews | Intellepedia

Patent examination should not kill the scientific temper of an inventor

The Madras High Court criticized inconsistent patent examination practices in Industeel France’s case, emphasizing the need for a fair and thorough evaluation process. The court ordered a de novo examination by a different Controller and stressed the importance of maintaining scientific temper.

New claims, Old claims, and Claim Amendments: Section 59 of the Patents Act

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court clarified that amending claims in a patent application does not imply abandonment of earlier claims. The court directed that decisions should be based on the amended claims. This analysis was part of Genomatica Inc. vs Controller of Patents case.

Renounced Riches, Not Rights! Court upholds Sanyasi’s copyrights

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, upholding Srila Prabhupada’s copyrights despite his status as a Sanyasi. The court decreed that Srila Prabhupada’s intellectual property rights were valid and had been rightfully assigned to the Trust.

Monoclonal antibodies and Patents – How the Madras High Court interpreted Section 3(c)

The Madras High Court clarified the interpretation of Section 3(c) in the context of monoclonal antibodies patent in Genmab A/S v. Assistant Controller of Patents. The court emphasized the importance of novelty and technical advancement for patent eligibility.

Authors, Copyright and Royalty Share : The Calcutta High Court gives clarity

The Calcutta High Court’s landmark decision in Vodafone v. Saregama clarifies the royalty rights of authors of literary and musical works. The ruling states that authors are entitled to royalties regardless of when their works were created or the nature of copyright ownership transfers.

All set for VOMISET : Court restores trademark and allows renewal beyond deadline

Indi Pharma Pvt Ltd successfully petitioned the High Court of Bombay to restore its trademark application for VOMISET and allow its renewal. The Court’s decision was based on the precedent set in the Motwane case, highlighting the importance of proper notification for trademark renewals.

Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

The Madras High Court criticized the Patent Office for using outdated CRI guidelines of 2016 instead of the revised 2017 guidelines in evaluating Microsoft’s patent application. The court emphasized the importance of assessing technical effect or contribution in CRIs without considering hardware.

Victory for Novozymes: Madras High Court Overrules Patent Office’s Refusal

The Madras High Court, in a decision dated March 19, 2024, set aside a patent refusal order issued by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs in the case of a patent application filed by Novozymes A/S. This post summarizes the decision of the court in this case.

Court says infringing brand ‘Double Kabooter’ Jaa Jaa Jaa

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Anuj Bindal, the prior user of ‘Dabal Kabooter Brand,’ in a trademark dispute against ‘Double Kabooter Brand.’ This case highlights the importance of prior use and the implications of false statements in trademark applications.

Snack Wars: Haldiram’s Battle for Brand Supremacy

Delhi High Court upholds Haldiram’s trademark rights, awarding Rs. 50 lakhs in damages and recognizing ‘HALDIRAM’ as a well-known mark in a legal battle against unauthorized use.