Section 59 | Intellepedia

Patent Claim Amendments – Court’s observation of amendments to systems, methods and use claims

Illustration of a peaceful, smiling monk in orange robes sitting cross-legged with eyes closed, surrounded by a yellow halo, under the curved text "It’s all about accepting the change" on a peach background.

The Calcutta High Court remanded a patent application back to the Controller of Patents, citing infrimities in evaluating claim amendments. The Court stressed that mere change in claim types—method to system—without analyzing technical substance cannot justify rejection under Section 59 of the Indian Patents Act.

AbbVie’s Patent Refusal Upheld over Impermissible Shift from Treatment to Product Claims

3D rendering of a blue virus particle surrounded by yellow antibodies, illustrating an immune response at the microscopic level

The Delhi High Court has dismissed AbbVie’s appeal regarding the refusal of their patent application for an anti-cMet antibody-drug conjugate. The court found the proposed amendments exceeded permissible scope under the Indian Patents Act.

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

The Madras High Court has set aside the refusal of Hygieia Inc.’s patent application, highlighting the need for proper consideration of amended claims. The court emphasized the importance of interpreting claims in conjunction with their specifications and has directed a re-examination of the application by a different controller within six months.

Delhi High Court Reverses Patent Office Decision: Honeywell’s Amendments Upheld

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Honeywell International Inc., overturning a refusal order by the Patent Office. The court emphasized the importance of fairness and the consideration of claims in conjunction with complete specifications, setting a precedent for thorough examination in patent matters.

New claims, Old claims, and Claim Amendments: Section 59 of the Patents Act

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court clarified that amending claims in a patent application does not imply abandonment of earlier claims. The court directed that decisions should be based on the amended claims. This analysis was part of Genomatica Inc. vs Controller of Patents case.

Courts Weigh on Inordinate Delay in Patent Orders and Scope of Claim Amendments

Delhi and Madras High Courts overturned patent refusals for ‘Theta Defensins’ and due to a 6-year delay, setting precedents on amendments and timely decisions.