Intellepedia | Page 6 of 300

Trademark Application Alone Not Enough for Infringement Suit

Comic-style image illustrating a courtroom scenario. On the left panel, a judge asks a person, "Have you used the trademark?" The person responds, "No, but I intend to!" In the right panel, the word "DENIED" appears boldly in red letters on a bright yellow background.

In Deepak Kumar Khemka v. Yogesh Kumar Jaiswal & Ors., the Delhi High Court held that filing a trademark application does not amount to trademark infringement. The Court dismissed the suit in limine, reiterating that infringement under the Trade Marks Act arises only from use in trade – not from proposed registration.

No Injunction After Patent Expiry, Holds Delhi High Court

An elderly woman in traditional clothing operates a spinning wheel in a dimly lit room. The word "EXPIRED" is prominently overlaid across the image in bold white letters.

In the case of Kabushiki Kaisha Toyota Jidoshokki v. LMW Limited, the Delhi High Court refused to grant an interim injunction after the expiry of the patent in suit. The Court held that patent rights lapse with expiry and cannot be enforced thereafter.

Delhi HC Remands Oxidation Process Patent Rejection, Cites Invalid Section 2(1)(j) and 59 Findings

Green chalkboard with various hand-drawn organic chemistry structures and chemical equations, including benzene rings, hydroxyl groups, and molecular formulas like N₂ + 3H₂ → 2NH₃, representing chemical reactions and compounds.

In the case of Treibacher Industrie AG v. Assistant Controller of Patents, the Delhi High Court set aside the refusal of a patent application for a catalytic oxidation process. It held that the amended claims qualified as a process invention and were within the permissible scope of amendment under Section 59.

AI Law and Regulation by Jon M Garon: A Highly Recommended Read

Book cover of “Artificial Intelligence Law and Regulation in a Nutshell” by Jon M. Garon, part of the Nutshell Series, published by West Academic. The cover design features a clean white and blue layout with modern typography.

In his book Artificial Intelligence Law and Regulation in a Nutshell, Professor Jon M Garon lays out how legal systems are responding to the rise of AI. The book is clear, practical, and highly relevant. With permission, we are sharing Chapter 9, which outlines a future facing roadmap for AI regulation. This book is a must read for anyone working with or impacted by AI.

When Copyright, AI, and Regulation Interact: Where Does Accessibility Stand?

A friendly blue robot holding a glowing light bulb stands beside the text “When Copyright, AI, and Regulation Interact” written in a bold, stencil-style font on a black background.

In the short time that AI applications and technologies were fully functional, accessibility took a huge step forward by enabling persons with disabilities to create accessible format works. But this seems to be regressing, and unless appropriate steps are taken, the advantage of AI to persons with disabilities may once again be limited to a small percentage of the content being created… Even though the law permits conversion into accessible formats, the tools available to users may no longer support it. This can lead to a situation where a legal right cannot be fully exercised because the available technology, though capable, may no longer facilitate accessible content creation.

Sweet victory and Sweeter rewards – court declares NUTELLA well-known Trademark

Delhi HC grants Ferrero ₹30 lakh in damages, declaring ‘NUTELLA’ a well-known trademark in a major counterfeit case against M.B. Enterprises.

Court delivers an ‘Iconic’ ruling in JOLLY RANCHER trademark dispute

**Alt Text:** Two cowboys face off in a sepia-toned standoff, symbolizing a trademark dispute. The cowboy on the left wears a "JOLLY RANCHER" hat and shirt, holding a candy bar. The cowboy on the right wears a "JOLLY RANGER" shirt and holds a gavel, representing legal confrontation.

Gujarat High Court quashes Shiv Textiles’ trademark suit against Iconic IP Interests LLC for lack of Indian jurisdiction and no valid cause of action under CPC.

Atomberg fans or Luker fans, whose “fan” are you?

Two futuristic pedestal fans labeled "Atomberg" and "Luker" face each other in a dark, dramatic setting. The Atomberg fan glows with blue neon light, while the Luker fan glows red. Wind blasts collide in the center, scattering debris and creating visible sparks, symbolizing intense rivalry or conflict.

The Bombay High Court dismissed Atomberg’s appeal against the denial of an interim injunction in a design infringement case against Luker. The court ruled that Atomberg’s fan design lacked novelty due to prior publication and was merely a trade variant.

Court Awards ₹50 Lakh to GSP Crop Science in Patent Infringement Case Over Agrochemical Formula

Wooden letter tiles arranged to spell "SELLER LIABILITY," highlighting the concept of seller liability in Patent infringement cases

Delhi HC orders ₹50 lakh in damages to GSP Crop Science for patent infringement in agrochemicals, affirming seller liability under Indian patent law.

Patented Biologics and Section 104A: No Process Disclosure Without Proving Product Identity

An image with the title "Biosimilars & Section 104A" written in a mixed-font, ransom-note style on a blue background. To the right, various colorful pills and tablets are spilling out of an orange prescription pill bottle.

Roche sued Zydus for infringing its process patent on Pertuzumab. The Delhi High Court held that Roche had not shown Zydus’s biosimilar was identical to its product. Without identity, Section 104A did not apply, and the Court refused to compel Zydus to disclose its manufacturing process.