Intellepedia | Page 47 of 305

Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has set aside a patent refusal for an image construction apparatus, citing insufficient reasoning under Section 3(k) and inventive step. The Court remanded the matter for reconsideration, highlighting the importance of well-reasoned decisions in patent law.

Another dynamic plus order to curb online piracy from the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has granted a dynamic plus injunction to Universal Studios against rogue websites facilitating online piracy. The order extends protections to future infringing sites and empowers ISPs and registrars to block access and share ownership information.

Where can you file Trademark Rectification Petitions? The Delhi High Court refers the question to a Larger Bench.

The Delhi High Court is reconsidering the proper jurisdiction for filing trademark rectification petitions. The question has been referred to a larger Bench for a definitive decision, with significant implications for trademark law in India.

R Indira Devi has no Copyrights over Guntur Sushendra Sharma’s “My Country My People”, says the Telangana High Court.

The Telangana High Court confirmed that R Indira Devi has no copyrights over Guntur Sushendra Sharma’s works, upholding the rights of Sharma’s son. The ruling provides important guidance on copyright assignments and succession under Indian law.

Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court set aside a patent refusal where the Controller relied on prior art not cited in the hearing notice. The decision underscores the importance of fair opportunity and proper analysis in patent proceedings in India.

Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court.

The Delhi High Court criticised the Controller of Patents for a superficial inventive step analysis in a recent patent refusal, emphasising the need for rigorous and well-reasoned assessments. The Court has directed a fresh hearing, highlighting the standards required under Indian patent law.

Indian Patent and Design Statistics 2024 (February 2nd to 9th)

This report reviews Indian patent and design statistics for February 2nd to 9th, 2024, detailing trends in applications, grants, and regional distributions. It offers factual analysis for IP professionals, compiled by BananaIP’s legal experts.

Trademark opposition timelines are mandatory, and must be complied strictly, says the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court clarified that trademark opposition timelines are mandatory and not subject to extension by the Registrar. The Court reinstated an opposition abandoned due to a minor delay in service, emphasizing strict statutory compliance.

Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court ruled that a method of producing protein enriched blood serum is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act. The Court set aside the refusal and directed the Patent Office to reconsider the application after a fresh hearing.

‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’ , and ‘Raashee’, Trademark Case Decisions

This blog post reviews key trademark infringement decisions by Indian High Courts, addressing damages, confusion, and judicial reasoning. It examines cases concerning rice, pan masala, and mosquito repellant trademarks, highlighting legal principles and practical implications for brand owners.