Madras High Court | Intellepedia

Courts Weigh on Inordinate Delay in Patent Orders and Scope of Claim Amendments

The Delhi and Madras High Courts recently set aside patent refusal orders, addressing inordinate delays and the scope of permissible claim amendments. These judgments clarify key patent law principles and reinforce procedural fairness in India.

PSITA is not omniscient, says Madras High Court. Overturns refusal order in favour of Microsoft.

The Madras High Court has overturned the refusal of Microsoft’s patent application, clarifying the correct approach to assessing inventive step and the PSITA standard under Indian law. The decision highlights the need for a nuanced analysis of prior art and patent claims.

Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks

The Madras High Court granted an injunction against the use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers trademarks, addressing a domain name dispute involving kalyanjewellers.com. The judgment reinforces protection for trademark owners in India.

Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

The Madras High Court has clarified that a trademark invalidity plea under Section 124 can be made in documents beyond the written statement, such as counter affidavits in interim applications. This broad interpretation ensures that the right to seek rectification is preserved even if the written statement is forfeited.

Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks

This post examines recent trademark cases from the Delhi, Calcutta, and Madras High Courts, focusing on injunctions and rectification. The analysis underlines the significance of registration and consistent trademark use for legal protection in India.

Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark

The Madras High Court set aside the refusal of United Foods’ word mark YOYO, allowing amendment to a label mark under Section 91. The matter was remanded for reconsideration, reflecting a practical judicial approach in trademark appeals.

Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

The Madras High Court held that a system for selectively concealing physical addresses in e-commerce is not a business method under Section 3k. The decision clarifies the distinction between technological inventions and business method exclusions in Indian patent law.

Refusal of patent application relating to ‘Soluble Foaming Composition’ set aside

The Madras High Court has overturned the Controller of Patents’ refusal of a soluble foaming composition patent, highlighting procedural lapses in considering applicant submissions. The matter will now be reconsidered by another patent officer within four months.

Madras High Court provides clarity on Proof of Right, says date of assignment and date of declaration are different.

The Madras High Court clarified the distinction between assignment and declaration dates for proof of right under Section 7(2) of the Patents Act. This ruling guides applicants and controllers on procedural objections in Indian patent applications.

Review and Reversal of Patent Refusal Orders by the Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has set aside several patent refusal orders, highlighting the need for proper reasoning and adherence to legal procedures. These judgments clarify essential aspects of patentability assessment and reinforce procedural fairness in Indian patent law.