The Delhi High Court held that a revocation petition under Section 64 of the Patents Act is distinct from an invalidity defence under Section 107 and remains valid post-patent expiry. The Court emphasized the broader legal impact of revocation, affirming its maintainability even when the patent has lapsed.
Read more about Revocation is Distinct from Invalidity Defence and Survives Patent Expiry, rules Delhi High CourtCategory: Patents
Court Affirms Controller’s Refusal: Invention deemed obvious to a person skilled in the art
The Madras High Court dismissed Navya Network Inc.’s appeal against the Patent Controller’s refusal, ruling that the claimed invention was obvious to a person skilled in the art. The judgment clarifies the approach to inventive step and non-patentability under Indian patent law, reinforcing standards for algorithm and method claims.
Read more about Court Affirms Controller’s Refusal: Invention deemed obvious to a person skilled in the artCan an Oversight by a Patent Agent Be a Ground for Abandoned Patent Application Revival?
Delhi High Court restores Ciena’s patent after agent oversight, affirming that patent application revival is possible under bona fide errors. Recognizing the global pursuit and lack of intent to abandon, the Court set aside the IPO’s order and allowed a fresh response to the FER.
Read more about Can an Oversight by a Patent Agent Be a Ground for Abandoned Patent Application Revival?Indian Patent Term Extension Rejected, Section 53 Constitutionally Upheld
Patent Term – Section 53 Challenge The appellants, Gunjan Sinha @ Kanishk Sinha and another, acquired a patent for a “fuel cell system and an...
Read more about Indian Patent Term Extension Rejected, Section 53 Constitutionally UpheldFailure to Disclose Prior Art in Hearing Notice Violates Procedural Fairness, Rules Calcutta High Court
Introduction The Calcutta High Court recently overturned the Controller’s decision to reject a patent application in the case of UCB Pharma GmbH & Anr. v....
Read more about Failure to Disclose Prior Art in Hearing Notice Violates Procedural Fairness, Rules Calcutta High CourtIndian IP Office Rolls Out Utility for Patent, Design, Trademark, Copyright & GI Statistics
The Indian IP Office has launched an online IP Statistics Dashboard offering real-time data on filings and registrations across IP types. Users can explore patent, trademark, copyright, design, and GI trends with interactive tools. Though provisional, the tool centralizes valuable insights into India’s IP landscape.
Read more about Indian IP Office Rolls Out Utility for Patent, Design, Trademark, Copyright & GI StatisticsRisdiplam – Spinal Muscular Atrophy Case: Delhi HC Favors Public Health Over Roche Patent
The Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling dated March 24th, 2024, rejected the interim injunction application of F Hoffmann-La Roche AG (“Roche”) against Natco...
Read more about Risdiplam – Spinal Muscular Atrophy Case: Delhi HC Favors Public Health Over Roche PatentWhen Delay Becomes Denial: Calcutta High Court Overturns Patent Rejection
The recent judgement of the Calcutta High Court in BASF SE v. Joint Controller of Patents warrants attention for multiple reasons, particularly as it addresses...
Read more about When Delay Becomes Denial: Calcutta High Court Overturns Patent RejectionFrom Algorithms To AI: Patentability Under The 2025 CRI Draft Guidelines
The 2025 Draft CRI Guidelines issued by the Indian Patent Office refine the criteria for patentability of Computer Related Inventions (CRIs), emphasizing technical effect, inventive step, sufficiency of disclosure, and proper claim drafting for AI, blockchain, and emerging technologies.
Read more about From Algorithms To AI: Patentability Under The 2025 CRI Draft GuidelinesPatentability vs. Procedure: Finding the Right Balance during patent examinations
Featured image for Patentability vs. Procedure: Finding the Right Balance during patent examinations
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Arcturus Therapeutics, overturning the Controller’s rejection of its patent application on procedural grounds. The Court emphasized that procedural compliance should not override substantive examination, directing the Patent Office to reassess the application on its merits.
Read more about Patentability vs. Procedure: Finding the Right Balance during patent examinations