‘Controller under an obligation to inform inventor’ says Madras High Court

The Madras High Court stressed that patent Controllers are obliged to provide detailed reasoning for refusals, enabling inventors to understand the grounds for rejection. The Court set aside two refusal orders and ordered fresh consideration, reinforcing the importance of transparency and due process in Indian patent law.

Read more about ‘Controller under an obligation to inform inventor’ says Madras High Court

Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

The Madras High Court condemned the Patent Office’s reliance on outdated CRI guidelines in Microsoft’s patent application case, highlighting the significance of technical effect in computer related inventions. The court allowed the appeal and directed a new evaluation.

Read more about Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court ruled that a method of producing protein enriched blood serum is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act. The Court set aside the refusal and directed the Patent Office to reconsider the application after a fresh hearing.

Read more about Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

Vitiation of IPAB and Beyond – Changes to the Indian Patents Act

The abolition of the IPAB has shifted appellate and adjudicatory functions under the Indian Patents Act to the High Courts. This post analyses the significant legal changes, outlining the expanded role of Indian High Courts in patent matters after the Tribunals Reforms Ordinance 2021.

Read more about Vitiation of IPAB and Beyond – Changes to the Indian Patents Act