In the case of Energeo Works India Private Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents, the Patent Office refused a patent application relating to an air cooling system that used a mist of water to pre cool ambient air entering an air cooled chiller assembly. The refusal was based on lack of inventive step in view of two prior art documents and common general knowledge. The applicant challenged the refusal on the ground that the order was unreasoned and that the Controller had not applied the correct legal test for obviousness.
Read more about Mist in the Machine, Haze in the Reasoning: Court Reiterates Mandatory Five-Step Test for Inventive StepTag: Indian Patent Act
Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates
Featured image for article: Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates
The Madras High Court overturned a patent refusal in Signal Pharmaceuticals vs. Deputy Controller of Patents, citing a lack of reasoning in the rejection order. The Court observed that the Patent Office failed to address the applicant’s arguments, disregarded amended claims, and provided no justification for the refusal under Section 2(1)(ja) and Section 3(d) of the Patents Act. The case was remanded for reconsideration, reinforcing the necessity of well-reasoned patent orders.
Read more about Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiteratesRefusal 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.
Read more about Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High CourtMadras High Court’s Progressive Stance on Patent Claim Amendments and Other Aspects
The Madras High Court has delivered important rulings on patent claim amendments, exclusions, and rejection protocols under Indian law. These decisions clarify key patentability standards and reinforce the necessity for precise drafting and strategic approach by patent professionals.
Read more about Madras High Court’s Progressive Stance on Patent Claim Amendments and Other AspectsCould an advanced Chat GPT be ‘the person skilled in the art’ for patent prosecution?
This article examines whether an advanced ChatGPT could fulfil the role of ‘person skilled in the art’ for patent prosecution in India. It analyses the legal definition and the potential for AI to support or transform patent examination.
Read more about Could an advanced Chat GPT be ‘the person skilled in the art’ for patent prosecution?Post-Grant Patent Opposition, Evidence and Hearings: Role of Patent Office, Opposition Board, and Parties
This post provides an analytical overview of the procedures and legal standards for post-grant patent opposition in India. It examines the Delhi High Court’s guidance on evidence, hearings, and the respective roles of the Patent Office and Opposition Board, underscoring the need for transparency and timely adjudication.
Read more about Post-Grant Patent Opposition, Evidence and Hearings: Role of Patent Office, Opposition Board, and PartiesPost-dating Patent Applications
This post addresses the process and legal implications of post-dating patent applications in India. It highlights statutory provisions, judicial interpretation, and practical risks associated with shifting the priority date.
Read more about Post-dating Patent ApplicationsThe Right Time and Means to Publish a Patent Application
This article discusses the legal timeline and methods for publishing a patent application in India. It covers statutory requirements, exceptions, early publication, and the implications for applicants and third parties.
Read more about The Right Time and Means to Publish a Patent ApplicationDemystifying the Evergreen myth
This post explores evergreening in pharmaceutical patents and how Section 3d of the Indian Patent Act limits patentability for incremental inventions. It discusses the implications for innovation, generic competition, and the evolving legal landscape in India.
Read more about Demystifying the Evergreen mythCompulsory License for “Not working”
This post discusses the legal grounds for granting compulsory licenses when patented drugs are not locally worked in India, as revealed through recent Form 27 compliance issues. It analyses relevant sections of the Indian Patent Act and the implications for innovator pharmaceutical companies.
Read more about Compulsory License for “Not working”