Case Reviews | Intellepedia

‘Big Dipper’ trademark infringement case, ruling on transborder reputation and importers’ rights

The Delhi High Court ruled on a trademark dispute between ‘Big Dipper’ and ‘Big Deeper,’ setting aside an ex parte injunction. The case centered on the assertion of transborder reputation by importers of the ‘Big Dipper’ mark. The Court relied on precedent to determine that mere global reputation is insufficient to claim trademark protection in India. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.

Court clarifies distinction between business methods and technical inventions in section 3(k) related case

The Delhi High Court set aside the Indian Patent Office’s rejection of Comviva Technologies Limited’s patent application under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970. The Court recognized that the invention provided a technical advancement in securing electronic payment transactions. It directed the Patent Office to proceed with granting the patent, subject to any further objections under the law.

Shoes, footwears and deceptive similarity in Trademark law

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction in favor of New Balance Athletics, Inc., restraining Kiran Shoe Company from infringing its trademarks. The Court awarded ₹7,00,000 in damages and costs, emphasizing that the defendant’s actions were deliberate and aimed at leveraging New Balance’s reputation.

Evaluation of Technical Advancement and Compliance with CRI Guidelines under Indian Patent Law

The Madras High Court allowed Idemia Identity & Security France’s appeal, setting aside a refusal order under Section 3(k) for a cryptography patent. The Court ruled the order as a non-speaking one and in violation of natural justice. It directed fresh consideration of the matter, emphasizing technical contributions and adherence to CRI and European guidelines.

Court reiterates importance of protecting consumers from confusion in case of pharma products

The Delhi High Court deliberated a trademark infringement case between Modi MundiPharma and Win Health Pharma. Allegations of deceptively similar trademarks in pharmaceutical products were raised, with the Court emphasizing the risk of consumer confusion. The application to challenge the validity of the defendant’s marks was disposed of, framing key issues on the marks’ invalidity.

“ACTIV” Trademark watch by CASTROL leads to win against deceptively similar mark

The Delhi High Court granted Castrol Limited a permanent injunction and damages for trademark and copyright infringement against defendants marketing deceptively similar lubricants. The judgment highlights the significance of protecting established trademarks and the legal remedies available in Indian courts.

Court refuses interim injunction based on Patent Prosecution History

The Delhi High Court refused an interim injunction in a patent dispute over a fuel cap, citing ambiguous claims and prosecution history. The judgment highlights the need for precise claim drafting and careful interpretation in patent litigation.

Cannot drive on ‘VOLVO’ and ‘FMX’ marks’ reputation rules court

The Delhi High Court has upheld the reputation of VOLVO and FMX trademarks, granting an injunction against unauthorised use by Lamina Suspension Products Ltd. The court recognised VOLVO as a well-known mark and enforced a settlement restricting further misuse.

Madras HC Overrules Procedural Rejection in France Telecom’s Patent Case

The Madras High Court allowed France Telecom’s writ petition, setting aside the procedural rejection of its patent application examination request. The judgment clarifies the treatment of agent errors under Indian patent law and upholds procedural fairness.

A jolly win for ‘JOLLY RANCHER’ against ‘JOKY RAMPER’

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction and damages to JOLLY RANCHER for trademark infringement and passing off by JOKY RAMPER. This decision underscores the importance of protecting trade dress and brand identity in the Indian confectionery market.