Patents | Intellepedia

Indian IP Office Schedules Stakeholder Meetings in Kolkata and Chennai on Draft CRI Guidelines

Illustration of four people in a meeting with the text "Stakeholder Meetings in Kolkata and Chennai for Guidelines on Computer-Related Inventions"

The Indian IP Office has scheduled in-person stakeholder meetings in Kolkata and Chennai, after the success of sessions in Mumbai and Delhi. to gather feedback on the Draft Guidelines for Computer Related Inventions (CRI). The initiative will allow stakeholders to share their inputs before the finalisation of the CRI policy framework.

Indian IP Office Announces Stakeholder Meetings on Draft CRI Guidelines

Illustration of five individuals around a table using laptops, and discussing

The Indian IP Office has scheduled in-person stakeholder meetings in Mumbai and Delhi to gather feedback on the Draft Guidelines for Computer Related Inventions (CRI). The initiative will allow stakeholders to share their inputs before the finalisation of the CRI policy framework.

What Have You Been Smoking? Personal bias has no place in Tobacco patent evaluation

A cigarette crossed out with a red prohibition sign, flanked by comic-style text bubbles reading "WHAT?" on the left and "WHY!" on the right, against a blue background

The Calcutta High Court has criticised the arbitrary rejection of a tobacco syrup patent by the Indian patent office, urging objective analysis over personal bias. It held that Section 3(b) must not be misused to deny legitimate inventions without proper legal scrutiny and evidence.

Failure to consider Post-filing data violates natural Justice, reiterates Calcutta High Court

3D molecular structure with colored spheres representing atoms (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen) on the left, accompanied by bold black text on a light beige background that reads: 'Failure to Consider Post-Filing Data Violates Natural Justice'

The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that failure to consider post-filing data in patent applications breaches natural justice. In the Takeda case, it found the refusal of a patent for Brigatinib unjustified due to the Controller’s oversight of vital evidence and remanded the matter for reevaluation.

Patent Rejection for Vehicle Monitoring System reversed by Court

Illustration of a delivery rider on a red scooter emerging from a mobile phone screen with a GPS map, spotlighting the text 'TVS Patent finds its way in Court!' alongside a gavel icon, symbolizing legal proceedings.

The Madras High Court allowed the appeal filed by TVS Motor Company against the rejection of its patent application pertaining to a Vehicle Monitoring System. The Court observed that the Controller had not adequately examined the validity of the cited prior art and had failed to provide a reasoned analysis with respect to the inventive step. Consequently, the matter was remanded to a different Controller for fresh consideration.

Revocation is Distinct from Invalidity Defence and Survives Patent Expiry, rules Delhi High Court

Gavel, law books, and justice scale beside the text "Revocation Is Distinct from Invalidity Defence and Survives Patent Expiry, Rules Delhi High Court" on a dark blue background.

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.

Court Affirms Controller’s Refusal: Invention deemed obvious to a person skilled in the art

Image of a green board with the text "Isn't it obvious?" written in Chalk

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.

Can an Oversight by a Patent Agent Be a Ground for Abandoned Patent Application Revival?

Can Oversight by Patent Agents Be Grounds for 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.

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...