28 articles
This abridged Novartis case by Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala explains the patentability requirements under Section 3(d) of Indian patent law. It provides a structured analysis of the legal…
The Indian government’s plan to engage US trained patent examiners has sparked debate over efficiency and policy direction in the patent office. This post analyses the benefits, concerns,…
This post examines Pfizer’s patent application on a known substance and the Indian Patent Office’s refusal in light of Section 3d and the Novartis decision. It discusses whether…
This post analyses the Indian Patent Office’s rejection of Pfizer’s Tofacitinib patent under Section 3(d). The decision addresses issues of novelty, inventive step, and the requirement for evidence…
The Indian Patent Office has revoked Roche’s Valganciclovir patent, emphasizing Section 3d and public interest. This decision strengthens access to medicines in India and curbs evergreening by pharmaceutical…
Gilead’s patent for Sofosbuvir was rejected by the Indian Patent Office on grounds of insufficient therapeutic efficacy. This landmark decision enables wider access to affordable generic Hepatitis C…
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…
The Novartis case established a strict test for therapeutic efficacy under Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, influencing the patentability of genetic inventions. This post examines the…