In Croda Inc. v. Controller of Patents, the Delhi High Court emphasized procedural fairness and ruled that the non-disclosure of prior art in a hearing notice constitutes a breach of natural justice. The Court remanded the case for fresh evaluation.
Read more about Non-Disclosure of Prior Art in Hearing Notice Violates Natural Justice, Rules Delhi High CourtCategory: Intellectual Property
When ‘WOW’ Isn’t Your Own: Trademark Infringement Between MOMO and BURGER
The Delhi High Court ruled that generic terms like WOW cannot be exclusively claimed as trademarks without strong secondary meaning. This decision emphasises the need for distinctive elements in branding under Indian trademark law.
Read more about When ‘WOW’ Isn’t Your Own: Trademark Infringement Between MOMO and BURGERWinning the Race for ‘X1’: A Trademark Dispute Resolved
The Delhi District Court resolved the X1 trademark dispute between Ashish Aggarwal and M/s Racing Promotions Pvt. Ltd by granting a permanent injunction. The judgment upholds the enforceability of trademark rights in sports event branding and addresses issues of infringement, jurisdiction, and profits.
Read more about Winning the Race for ‘X1’: A Trademark Dispute ResolvedGlucon-D and Glucon-C Trademark Suit: Court Says Pre-Litigation Mediation is Mandatory
In the case of Zydus Wellness Products Ltd. v. Karnal Foods Pack Cluster Limited, involving the trademarks “Glucon-D” and “Glucon-C”, the Himachal Pradesh High Court reiterated that plaintiffs must mandatorily attempt pre-litigation mediation before filing commercial suits, unless there is a clear and justifiable urgency requiring interim relief. The Court examined the timeline of the plaintiff’s actions and found no genuine urgency to bypass the mediation step.
Read more about Glucon-D and Glucon-C Trademark Suit: Court Says Pre-Litigation Mediation is MandatoryPharmacyclics Divisional Patent Application Upheld by Calcutta High Court
Calcutta High Court upholds Pharmacyclics divisional patent application for ibrutinib-anti-CD20 therapy, interpreting Section 16 of the Patents Act, 1970.
Read more about Pharmacyclics Divisional Patent Application Upheld by Calcutta High CourtFrom Refusal to Reconsideration: A Second Chance for Zhejiang’s Hair Dye Patent
Madras High Court gives Zhejiang’s hair dye patent a new lease on life, quashing an unreasoned refusal and directing a fresh, reasoned hearing.
Read more about From Refusal to Reconsideration: A Second Chance for Zhejiang’s Hair Dye PatentProducts Made During Patent Term are Infringing Even After Expiry
In the case of Boehringer Ingelheim v. Femilab Healthcare, the Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that interim injunctions granted to prevent patent infringement cannot continue after the patent has expired. The court held that such relief loses effect with the end of the patent term. However, it stated that infringing products made during the patent’s validity may still be restrained from being sold or used after the patent expires.
Read more about Products Made During Patent Term are Infringing Even After ExpiryNo Trademark Infringement by Registered Proprietor
The Bombay High Court ruled that no trademark infringement or passing off was established against the registered proprietor of KARPURE and AIR KARPURE. The Court found the marks and trade dress sufficiently distinct, dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim for interim relief.
Read more about No Trademark Infringement by Registered ProprietorAmgen’s Lyophilized Peptibody Patent Upheld by Madras High Court
Madras High Court backs Amgen on lyophilized peptibody formulations, rejecting Section 3(d), 3(e) and inventive step objections. Grant directed, with claims narrowed to supported sequences.
Read more about Amgen’s Lyophilized Peptibody Patent Upheld by Madras High CourtYatra Trademark Claim Rejected: No Monopoly Over Common Travel Terms, Says Court
In the case of Yatra Online Limited v. Mach Conferences and Events Limited, the Delhi High Court examined whether a travel company could claim exclusive rights over the term ‘YATRA’. Concluding that the mark was descriptive and not distinctive, the Court refused to restrain the defendant from using a similar mark.
Read more about Yatra Trademark Claim Rejected: No Monopoly Over Common Travel Terms, Says Court