Case Reviews | Intellepedia

Objections regarding insufficiency of disclosure in patent applications must be clear and unambiguous

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that objections on insufficiency of disclosure in patent applications must be clear and precise. Procedural lapses by the Indian patent office can undermine the fairness of the patent examination process.

Courts Weigh on Inordinate Delay in Patent Orders and Scope of Claim Amendments

The Delhi and Madras High Courts recently set aside patent refusal orders, addressing inordinate delays and the scope of permissible claim amendments. These judgments clarify key patent law principles and reinforce procedural fairness in India.

PSITA is not omniscient, says Madras High Court. Overturns refusal order in favour of Microsoft.

The Madras High Court has overturned the refusal of Microsoft’s patent application, clarifying the correct approach to assessing inventive step and the PSITA standard under Indian law. The decision highlights the need for a nuanced analysis of prior art and patent claims.

Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks

The Madras High Court granted an injunction against the use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers trademarks, addressing a domain name dispute involving kalyanjewellers.com. The judgment reinforces protection for trademark owners in India.

Court orders Meesho to display Seller Information and comply with Ecommerce Rules

The Delhi High Court has ordered Meesho to display full seller information and comply with ecommerce regulations following a copyright dispute. This decision highlights the responsibility of e-commerce platforms to protect intellectual property and ensure transparency for consumers.

Trademark refusal without notice and ‘40’ suffix similarity

Two recent Delhi High Court rulings clarify the consequences of unserved opposition notices and the assessment of trademark similarity based on numeric suffixes. The post analyses both decisions and discusses the procedural challenges in Indian trademark law.

Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions

This post discusses key Indian trademark cases on removal and injunctions, with courts emphasising notice requirements for removal and granting injunctions against Fly Hi and Timespro infringers. The analysis highlights recent judicial trends in trademark protection.

Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, confirms the Bombay High Court.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that prosecution history estoppel extends to trademark cases, impacting a party’s rights based on prior representations. Full disclosure of all prosecution material is required in trademark litigation for fair adjudication.

3 Roses, Brooke Bond, Tiche, and Ahuja Trademark Cases

This post analyses recent Indian trademark cases involving 3 Roses, Brooke Bond, Tiche, and Ahuja. It discusses counterfeiting, damages, and wrongful registration issues, providing insights for trademark owners and distributors.

Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

The Madras High Court has clarified that a trademark invalidity plea under Section 124 can be made in documents beyond the written statement, such as counter affidavits in interim applications. This broad interpretation ensures that the right to seek rectification is preserved even if the written statement is forfeited.