Patent Law india | Intellepedia

Amendment of claims at Appellate Stage under section 59 of the Patents Act

Banner graphic displaying the text “Amendment of Claims at Appellate Stage” with a central icon representing a heat exchanger, on a blue and tan background.

In the case of Daikin Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Indian Patent Office refused Daikin’s patent application relating to a shell and plate heat exchanger on the ground of lack of novelty over a prior art document. During the appeal before the High Court, Daikin sought permission to amend claim 1 by incorporating additional limitations already disclosed in the specification. The court examined whether such an amendment could be permitted at the appellate stage under Section 59 of the Patents Act.

Court Remands Patent Rejection Over IV Catheter, Cites Flawed Obviousness Test

A nurse applies an intravenous catheter to a patient's arm while seated on a couch,

Delhi HC sets aside patent rejection for IV catheter, citing flawed inventive step analysis under Agriboard test and lack of reasoned decision.

Cannot raise new ground while refusing patent, rules Delhi High Court

Illustration with text "New grounds for patent refusal?" in orange font on a light purple background, alongside a yellow hand pointing upward with the word "NO" repeated on each finger.

Delhi HC set aside a patent refusal against Proprietect L P, citing violation of natural justice, failure to consider amended claims, and lack of reasoning.

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.

Patented But Still Infringing: Delhi HC Stops Hydromat Valve Sales

Close-up view of industrial metal control valves and piping system, showing aged and weathered valve wheels used for regulating fluid flow.

In the case of Aquestia Limited vs Automat Industries Private Limited & Ors., the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing and selling their ‘Hydromat’ valves. The court held that even a patented product can infringe an earlier patent, and found that the defendants’ valves incorporated the core features of the plaintiff’s fluid control valve patent claims.

Patented Biologics and Section 104A: No Process Disclosure Without Proving Product Identity

An image with the title "Biosimilars & Section 104A" written in a mixed-font, ransom-note style on a blue background. To the right, various colorful pills and tablets are spilling out of an orange prescription pill bottle.

Roche sued Zydus for infringing its process patent on Pertuzumab. The Delhi High Court held that Roche had not shown Zydus’s biosimilar was identical to its product. Without identity, Section 104A did not apply, and the Court refused to compel Zydus to disclose its manufacturing process.

Indian Patent Office Issues Draft CRI Guidelines 2025 – Version 2.0: Key Additions and Changes

A digital illustration showing a polygonal human face on the left, facing a blue background filled with interconnected binary digits and nodes, with bold text in the center reading “Draft CRI guidelines Version 2.0.”

Version 2.0 of the Draft CRI Guidelines 2025 introduces updated examination procedures for AI, blockchain, and quantum-based inventions, and includes an extensive annexure of examples clarifying Section 3(k) exclusions.

ITC’s Nicotine Device Patent Rejection on Public Health Grounds Set Aside

Text reading "Intent, Not Harm, Defines Section 3(b)" displayed in bold white font on a dark smoky background

The Calcutta High Court has set aside the refusal of ITC’s patent application for a nicotine aerosol device. The Court found that the Controller’s reliance on morality grounds under Section 3(b) was improper and unsupported by cited documents, ensuring a fresh review of the patent.

Patent for Enzyme-Based Animal Feed Supplementation Cleared of Section 3(i) Refusal

Cows feeding on hay in a livestock enclosure with an overlaid banner text that reads "Feed Supplementation Not A Method of Treatment".

The Madras High Court has allowed Kemin Industries’ patent on an enzyme-based animal feed method, overturning the Controller’s Section 3(i) refusal. The Court ruled that the method involves feed supplementation rather than treatment, confirming novelty and inventive step in the process.

Anti-Cancer Patent Refusal Set Aside for Not Identifying ‘Known Substance’

A colourful collage of sticky notes spelling out the word "UNKNOWN" is placed against a green and black background, with a blurred field of black question marks in the backdrop symbolising ambiguity and lack of clarity.

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court overturned the rejection of an anti-cancer patent filed by Taiho Pharmaceutical. The Court highlighted that objections under Section 3(d) must explicitly state the “known substance” being referenced and directed a fresh hearing for proper assessment.