Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

Delhi High Court reverses Patent refusal, Highlights significance of procedural adherence in handling claims of PCT National phase applications.

The Delhi High Court overturned a patent refusal for a PCT national phase application, stressing the importance of procedural adherence in claim examination. The Court directed a fresh evaluation, emphasizing accurate application of legal provisions and detailed analysis of objections.

No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition.

The Delhi High Court dismissed an interim injunction plea, holding that the use of the common surname JINDAL cannot be monopolised under trademark law. The court found no infringement or passing off, as the impugned mark was sufficiently distinct.

All elements rule versus Doctrine of equivalents, a recent decision by Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently addressed the interplay between the all elements rule and the doctrine of equivalents in a patent dispute over brick-making machines. The Court granted interim relief, affirming a nuanced approach to patent claim analysis and infringement in Indian law.

Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits

The Delhi High Court has restrained the use of the TOWER trademark on dry fruits, finding a risk of consumer confusion and breach of a prior undertaking. The order clarifies trademark enforcement boundaries and highlights the importance of respecting agreed limitations in Indian IP disputes.

The Delhi High Court directs the Examiner to advertise the ‘Bharat’ mark after examining all the objections.

The Delhi High Court remitted the ‘Bharat’ trademark application to the Examiner for reconsideration, focusing on unresolved Section 11(1) objections. The Court clarified that the application must be advertised, preserving the statutory right of third parties to object before registration.

Rejecting Patent Applications without Comprehensive Analysis Contradicts Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, says Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court set aside a patent refusal, holding that applications must be assessed with thorough reasoning under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act. The judgment stresses the need for detailed analysis of inventive step and legal compliance in patent rejections.

Patent refusal order set aside, matter remanded back for DeNovo consideration

The Delhi High Court set aside a patent refusal order under section 15 of the Patents Act, directing a de novo reconsideration. The case underscores the need for reasoned decisions in Indian patent law proceedings.

Kudos Pharma v. Natco Pharma: A case on patent claims, coverage, validity and infringement.

The Delhi High Court’s decision in Kudos Pharma v. Natco Pharma reviews crucial aspects of patent law, including credible challenge and the distinction between patent coverage and disclosure. The Court granted an interim injunction to Kudos Pharma, reinforcing core principles of Indian patent jurisprudence.

The words ‘KONDRU’ and ‘LOBAN’ are Publici Juris, says the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that ‘KONDRU’ and ‘LOBAN’ are generic terms and cannot be monopolised as trademarks. The judgment emphasises that such terms, being publici juris, are not eligible for exclusive trademark rights.

Patent refusals: The need for clarity and details beyond mere objections.

The Delhi High Court has stressed the necessity for detailed reasoning in patent refusal decisions. In this case, the absence of specific analysis and clarity in rejecting a divisional application led to the order being set aside and remanded for reconsideration.