Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

“DREAM FREEDOM” Trademark removed from register for Deceptive Similarity

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Gemini Edibles and Fats India Ltd. in a trademark rectification petition, directing the removal of the “DREAM FREEDOM” mark from the Register of Trade Marks. The court found that the respondent had deceptively adopted the mark and trade dress of Gemini’s “FREEDOM” brand, leading to potential consumer confusion. The ruling reinforced the principles of prior use and deceptive similarity in trademark law.

Patent Abandonment Overturned: Delhi HC Rules on FER Miscommunication

The Delhi High Court set aside the deemed abandonment of Waterotor’s Indian patent application, citing miscommunication regarding the First Examination Report (FER). The Court ruled that the lack of timely FER receipt justified reinstatement, directing the Patent Office to restore the application’s status to “pending” and allow a response within four weeks.

A battle for respect : Svamaan Financial Takes on Sammaan Capital in Trademark case

In a significant trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Svamaan Financial Services, granting an interim injunction against Sammaan Capital Limited and its affiliates. The Court found that the defendants’ marks were deceptively similar to Svamaan, potentially misleading consumers. The ruling reinforces the importance of brand identity and legal recourse in financial services.

Clarifying Patentability of Plant Treatment Methods under Section 3(h) and 3(i)

The Delhi High Court, in Syngenta Crop Protection AG vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, examined the rejection of an Indian patent application under Section 3(h) of the Patents Act. The Court ruled that plant treatment methods are distinct from agricultural processes, referring to the 2003 amendment to Section 3(i), and remanded the case for fresh examination with amended claims.

Court reiterates importance of protecting consumers from confusion in case of pharma products

The Delhi High Court deliberated a trademark infringement case between Modi MundiPharma and Win Health Pharma. Allegations of deceptively similar trademarks in pharmaceutical products were raised, with the Court emphasizing the risk of consumer confusion. The application to challenge the validity of the defendant’s marks was disposed of, framing key issues on the marks’ invalidity.

Court refuses interim injunction based on Patent Prosecution History

The Delhi High Court refused an interim injunction sought by Jay Switches in a patent infringement dispute against Sandhar Technologies. The Court found no prima facie infringement of Jay Switches’ patent for an airtight fuel cap and highlighted ambiguity in the claims. Sandhar was directed to maintain detailed accounts of product sales pending further proceedings.

Cannot drive on ‘VOLVO’ and ‘FMX’ marks’ reputation rules court

The Delhi High Court passed a permanent injunction and summary judgment in favor of AB Volvo and its group companies in a trademark infringement suit against Lamina Suspension Products Ltd. The court restrained the Defendant from using the “VOLVO” and “FMX” trademarks on leaf spring products, enforcing the settlement terms and protecting Volvo’s well-known trademarks in India.

Revisiting Novartis versus Natco – Cancer drugs, divisional applications and patent validity

The Delhi High Court upheld Novartis’s patent on Ceritinib, rejecting Natco Pharma’s claims of invalidity and allegations of material suppression. The court ruled that the divisional application’s refusal was immaterial to the case and reaffirmed the patent’s validity based on inventive step, novelty, and therapeutic benefits. Natco’s application to vacate the injunction was dismissed.

ITC obtains injunction against former owners of NIMYLE and JOR-POWR Trademarks

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction to ITC Limited, restraining Arpita Agro from using the deceptively similar trademark “POWRNYM.” The case highlights issues of trademark infringement, passing off, and contractual obligations, emphasizing the importance of protecting intellectual property rights.

COCOMELON spells a ‘Melon’cholic end for Copycat Competitors

The Delhi High Court ordered the cancellation of a deceptively similar COCOMELON trademark registered by the respondent. Treasure Studio Inc., the creators of the globally recognized children’s brand, successfully secured relief, ensuring stronger protection for its distinctive trademark and intellectual property rights.