6 articles
Labeling a test as ‘screening’ doesn’t make it patentable if it decides treatment. In Geron Corporation’s case, measuring telomere length to decide who receives telomerase therapy made the…
In Hirotsu Bio Science v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court held that branding a process as “in vitro detection” does not rescue it…
In the case of EMD Millipore Corporation vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court held that a non-invasive method for analysing biomolecules is not…
Delhi HC rules Sequenom’s NIPT methods are excluded as “diagnostic” under Section 3(i) and hit by 3(b) for sex selection concerns, while keeping the door open for tools…
In two recent decisions, the Madras High Court reversed patent application rejections under Section 3(i), clarifying that only diagnostic methods disclosing pathology per se fall within the exclusion.…
This article analyses the legal boundaries for patenting scientific principles and natural relationships, with a focus on the Laboratory Corp v Metabolite case. It explores US Supreme Court…