Patents | Intellepedia

You Shouldn’t have filed a Post-Grant Opposition, says Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court in Safex Chemical India Ltd vs The Controller Of Patents clarified procedures for patent oppositions. The Court dismissed Safex’s writ, emphasising adherence to the statutory process under Indian patent law.

CASE BRIEF: FMC Corporation & Ors. vs. Natco Pharma Limited

The Delhi High Court analysed whether Natco Pharma’s process infringed FMC Corporation’s patented method for producing chlorantraniliprole. The court, relying on expert opinions, found key differences in process steps and chemical agents, leading to a decision of non-infringement.

Without Proper Inventive Step Analysis, Patent Office’s Order is Unreasoned – Says Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court set aside a Patent Office order rejecting Gogoro Inc’s application for lack of inventive step, citing inadequate reasoning. The case was remanded for proper analysis under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act.

Divisional Applications cannot exceed scope of Parent Application: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has clarified that divisional applications under the Patents Act must not exceed the scope of the parent application and require plurality of inventions in the original claims. This decision reinforces the primacy of claims in determining the scope of patent protection.

Indian IP Office invites entries for National IP Awards, 2021 and 2022

The Indian IP Office is inviting entries for the National Intellectual Property Awards 2021 and 2022, celebrating excellence in IP creation and innovation. Submissions are open until 31st August, 2022, with detailed guidelines and categories outlined in the official announcement.

Indian IP Cases Report, 2021

BananaIP’s Indian IP Cases Report, 2021 provides concise case notes on key intellectual property decisions by Indian courts. It covers patents, trademarks, designs, and copyrights, offering structured analysis and references for further research.

Principles for filing Divisional Patent Applications in India

This post reviews the legal principles for filing divisional patent applications in India, focusing on the requirement for a plurality of inventions in the parent application’s claims. It provides an analytical overview of recent court decisions and statutory provisions governing the process.

CASE BRIEF: Novo Nordisk AS vs. Union of India & Ors.

The Delhi High Court’s decision in Novo Nordisk AS vs. Union of India addresses key procedural and substantive aspects of post grant patent opposition in India. The judgment clarifies evidentiary requirements, parties’ rights regarding Opposition Board reports, and the strict timelines under the Patents Act and Rules.

Delhi High Court asks the Patent Office to decide on amendments and give adequate opportunity in Opposition Proceedings

The Delhi High Court has provided clear procedural guidance for patent opposition proceedings, focusing on transparency and fair opportunity for all parties. The judgment underscores the importance of timely decisions on claim amendments and systematic handling of pre-grant oppositions by the Indian Patent Office.

Post-Grant Patent Opposition, Evidence and Hearings: Role of Patent Office, Opposition Board, and Parties

This post provides an analytical overview of the procedures and legal standards for post-grant patent opposition in India. It examines the Delhi High Court’s guidance on evidence, hearings, and the respective roles of the Patent Office and Opposition Board, underscoring the need for transparency and timely adjudication.