Non Obviousness | Intellepedia

Patent on Portable Vehicle Management System goes offtrack

The Delhi High Court upheld the refusal of a patent application for a portable vehicle management system, citing lack of inventive step over prior art. This case highlights the application of key Indian patent law principles on non-obviousness and inventive step, particularly regarding mosaicing and hindsight bias.

Non-Obviousness and the Trilogy

This post examines the Supreme Court’s non-obviousness trilogy and its interpretation of Section 103 in US patent law. Key concepts such as prior art and the standard of ordinary skill are analysed, with a focus on legal clarity and accuracy.

The TSM Test and Non-obviousness

The TSM test is crucial for determining non-obviousness in patent law by evaluating whether prior art teaches, suggests, or motivates the invention. This structured approach ensures that only inventions demonstrating a significant leap in ingenuity are granted patents under Indian law.

The Non-Obviousness Requirement and its Evolution – Graham vs. John Deere

This post discusses Graham vs John Deere and its importance in shaping the non-obviousness requirement under US patent law. It provides an analytical overview of the case, judicial reasoning, and ongoing relevance for patentability standards.

From Dress Pin to Safety Pin

Inventive step or non-obviousness is essential for patentability and is illustrated here through the development of the Dress Pin and Safety Pin. This analysis objectively examines how improvements in such inventions meet the legal requirements for patent protection.

Non-obviousness of Biotech Inventions in USA

This post provides an analytical review of non-obviousness standards for biotechnology inventions in the USA, referencing key Federal Circuit decisions. It discusses the evolving judicial approach and inconsistencies in applying patentability requirements to biotech innovations.

Patent Prosecution in the Automobile Industry

[slideshare id=54003284&doc=patentprosecution-151016030727-lva1-app6892] This presentation was delivered by Aishwarya Narayan as a part of the course for senior management and IP Officers in the...

Is Criteria to Determine Obviousness in Patent Still Ambiguous?

The post discusses the persistent ambiguity in the legal criteria for determining obviousness in patent matters. It assesses recent judicial trends and the impact of landmark cases like KSR v Teleflex, noting the continued subjectivity in evaluating inventive step in India.

Special 301 Report: Chapter V. Inventive Step & 3(d) – Comprehending Apprehension or Apprehending Comprehension?

This post critically examines whether Section 3d serves as an extension of the inventive step analysis or as a separate requirement under Indian patent law. It discusses the legal and judicial perspectives on TRIPs compliance and the nuanced challenges in pharmaceutical patentability.