Indian Patent Law | Intellepedia

Infrared-Based Biomolecule Detection is Not excluded under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act: Delhi HC

Close-up of a metallic microscope lens projecting an infrared beam onto stylized chemical structures, with DNA-like strands and an “IR” graph on a dark background.

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 excluded from patentability under Section 3(i). The Court allowed the applicant to revert to earlier claims and upheld the right to amend claims in appeal.

Calcutta High Court Clarifies Scope of Section 3(h) in Patent Law: Base SE v. Controller of Patents

Silhouette of a farmer spraying crops with pesticides on one side and a tractor on the other, with rows of crop plants in between, set against a green background.

In Base SE v. Deputy Controller of Patents, the Calcutta High Court ruled that scientific and technical inventions addressing agricultural problems are not excluded under Section 3(h). It also clarified that partial grant of patent claims is not permitted under Indian patent law.

Saint-Gobain Patent Rejection: Delhi HC Finds No Inventive Step in Glass Coating Claim

Illustration of a judge holding a gavel beside broken glass shards, with the text "Delhi High Court Rejects Saint-Gobain's Patent Application on Glass Coatings Due to Lack of Inventive Step" on a pastel gradient background.

Delhi HC upholds Saint-Gobain patent rejection, ruling that the glass coating claim lacked inventive step and failed to show technical advancement.

Old Wine in New Bottle: Distillery Waste Patent Denied

Two bottles are placed side by side against a muted background. The bottle on the left is labeled "DISTILLERY WASTE" and contains a dark liquid, while the bottle on the right is labeled "PATENT DENIED" and also contains a similar dark liquid.

Delhi HC affirms rejection of a patent on ZLD process from distillery waste, citing lack of inventive step and application of Section 3(d) of the Patents Act.

No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

A stylized laboratory scene showing a large blue capsule being constructed by steampunk-style mechanical arms, with sparks flying. A wooden sign next to the capsule reads "UNDER CONSTRUCTION," symbolizing a drug still in development. Various lab equipment is visible in the background.

In the case of Helsinn Healthcare SA vs AET Laboratories, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a patent infringement action filed in anticipation of future infringement. The Court examined the territorial reach of Indian courts in web-based patent matters and reaffirmed the principles required to sustain quia timet actions.

CRI Patentability Affirmed: Madras High Court Rules in Favor of Syngene

Illustration of a legal decision on computer-related inventions: code snippet on the left, legal gavel and scales on the right, with the title 'Madras HC Reboots Computer-Related Invention Refusal' in the center.

Madras HC upholds CRI patentability in Syngene’s case, ruling novel hardware isn’t a prerequisite for protection under Section 3(k).

Non-Disclosure of Prior Art in Hearing Notice Violates Natural Justice, Rules Delhi High Court

3D illustration of repeating blue molecular structures representing chemical compounds, symbolizing scientific formulations or agrochemical compositions.

In Croda Inc. v. Controller of Patents, the Delhi High Court emphasized procedural fairness and ruled that the non-disclosure of prior art in a hearing notice constitutes a breach of natural justice. The Court remanded the case for fresh evaluation.

Pharmacyclics Divisional Patent Application Upheld by Calcutta High Court

3D molecular structures illustrating chemical bonding and a detailed fluorinated organic compound model with carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and fluorine atoms

Calcutta High Court upholds Pharmacyclics divisional patent application for ibrutinib-anti-CD20 therapy, interpreting Section 16 of the Patents Act, 1970.

Amgen’s Lyophilized Peptibody Patent Upheld by Madras High Court

Banner with lab test tubes and a microscope; text reads 'Amgen’s Peptibody Patent Refusal Overturned' following Madras High Court ruling

Madras High Court backs Amgen on lyophilized peptibody formulations, rejecting Section 3(d), 3(e) and inventive step objections. Grant directed, with claims narrowed to supported sequences.

Delhi High Court Patent Injunction: Aquestia Wins Against Automat Industries

A 3D-rendered digital image depicting a legal and engineering theme. The foreground shows a judge's gavel resting on legal documents with metal fittings and coins scattered nearby. In the background, mechanical valve systems are integrated with justice scales, symbolizing a legal dispute over industrial components, likely fluid control valves. The scene combines elements of law and technology, representing a patent conflict or court ruling in an engineering context.

Delhi High Court grants patent injunction to Aquestia, stopping Automat from selling Hydromat valves over suspected patent infringement.