Mind Your Claims: Delhi High Court Frames Guidelines for Mental Acts Under Section 3(m)
In the case of T-Mobile International AG and Co. KG v. The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks and Another, the Delhi High Court addressed a…
198 articles
In the case of T-Mobile International AG and Co. KG v. The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks and Another, the Delhi High Court addressed a…
In the case of Saathi, Inc. v. Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks and Anr., a granted patent was revoked despite an Opposition…
The Bombay High Court, in Navya Network Inc. v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, set aside a patent refusal for a "Medical Research Retrieval Engine," ruling that…
In Patent Application No. 202017019068, Stephen L. Thaler named DABUS, an artificial intelligence system, as the inventor of a food container invention. The Opponent challenges that position by…
In the case of Patent Application No. 202017019068, Stephen L. Thaler sought a patent for a food container invention and named DABUS, an artificial intelligence system, as the…
In Hirotsu Bio Science v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court held that branding a process as “in vitro detection” does not rescue it…
The Calcutta High Court overturns OCV patent rejection, reinforcing 'teaching away' doctrine, inventive step analysis, and Section 3(e) interpretation.
Delhi High Court rules employment agreements valid as proof of right under Section 7(2), aiding patent filings involving deceased inventors.
In the case of M/s Sunhok Wheels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs The State of West Bengal & Ors., the Calcutta High Court addressed whether claims of patent…
In the case of TVS Motor Company vs Patent Office, a scooter maker's patent claim for a simple yet novel frame design was rejected for lacking inventive step.…