Patent Refusal | Intellepedia

Ziegler-Natta Catalyst Patent Rejection Upheld for Lack of Inventive Step

Illustration of a judge at a courtroom bench holding a gavel, smiling and giving a thumbs down, with a speech bubble saying “This is ‘Natta’ Catalyst” – a pun referring to the rejection of a Ziegler-Natta catalyst patent.

The Delhi High Court upheld the refusal of Lummus Novolen’s patent for a Ziegler-Natta catalyst, citing lack of inventive step and similarity to prior art. Read the key observations and legal reasoning.

Blackberry’s Patent Refusal Set Aside by Delhi High Court

City skyline at night with glowing Wi-Fi symbols and connection lines, representing wireless communication and smart city connectivity

The Delhi High Court has set aside the Indian Patent Office’s refusal of Blackberry’s communication patent application. Citing a lack of reasoning and violation of natural justice principles, the Court directed a fresh evaluation of the amendments and remaining objections under the Patents Act.

Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates

The Madras High Court overturned a patent refusal in Signal Pharmaceuticals vs. Deputy Controller of Patents, citing a lack of reasoning in the rejection order. The Court observed that the Patent Office failed to address the applicant’s arguments, disregarded amended claims, and provided no justification for the refusal under Section 2(1)(ja) and Section 3(d) of the Patents Act. The case was remanded for reconsideration, reinforcing the necessity of well-reasoned patent orders.

Madras High Court Overturns Patent Refusal under section 3(d), Reiterates Importance of Reasoned Orders and Natural Justice

The Madras High Court set aside a patent refusal under section 3d, citing lack of procedural fairness and insufficient reasoning. The Court directed reconsideration, underscoring the necessity of reasoned orders and respect for principles of natural justice in patent proceedings.

Section 3(j), Essentially biological processes and human intervention

The Madras High Court considered whether human intervention in a plant breeding method excluded it from section 3(j) of the Patents Act. The case was remanded to the Patent Office, underlining the importance of clear reasoning in patent refusals involving essentially biological processes.

A doped order on method of doping, court clarifies

The Madras High Court upheld the Patent Office’s refusal of IIT Madras’s patent application for a method of doping potassium into ammonium perchlorate. The judgment clarifies the application of Section 3d and inventive step requirements in Indian patent law.

Green Cross Crosses court’s bridge to win appeal

The Madras High Court set aside the patent refusal order against Green Cross, highlighting errors in the assessment of inventive step and technical disclosure. The case has been remanded for fresh examination within four months, with directions to provide a hearing to Green Cross.

Court balances Hygieia’s patent application after IPO disbalances it under section 59

The Madras High Court set aside the refusal of Hygieia’s patent application, stressing the importance of considering amended claims with the original specification. The case provides key guidance on section 59 and claim amendments under Indian patent law.

“Focus on technology, not semantics” says court in case involving gene technology

The Madras High Court set aside a patent refusal for a gene technology application, criticising the Controller’s excessive focus on semantics over scientific content. The judgment directs the patent office to reconsider the application with an emphasis on technological merit.

Court Cranks the Clock Back on Opposed Crankshaft Patent Refusal

The Madras High Court set aside the refusal of an opposed piston engine patent, citing insufficient analysis of inventive features. The case underscores the need for detailed examination of claim amendments and inventive step in Indian patent proceedings.