BananaIP Counsels Logo

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Image accompanying blogpost on "Refusal of patent application relating to 'Soluble Foaming Composition' set aside"

Refusal of patent application relating to ‘Soluble Foaming Composition’ set aside

Protein-free foaming innovation revived! Madras High Court overturns patent refusal due to Controller’s failure to address key arguments and consider crucial differences from prior art. This judgment highlights the importance of thorough analysis and considering applicant submissions in patent decisions. Continue Reading Refusal of patent application relating to ‘Soluble Foaming Composition’ set aside
February 22, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 151Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Madras High court provides clarity on Proof of right, says date of assignment and date of declaration are different."

Madras High Court provides clarity on Proof of Right, says date of assignment and date of declaration are different.

In this case, the Madras High Court sheds light on proving applicant’s right, emphasizing the difference between assignment and declaration dates. This case offers insights for smoother patent applications in India and is likely to provide much-needed clarity to Applicants and Controllers alike who often encounter the same or similar objections relating to proof of right under Section 7(2) and Rule 10 of the Patents Act. Continue Reading Madras High Court provides clarity on Proof of Right, says date of…
February 21, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 203Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "by the Madras High Court"

Review and Reversal of Patent Refusal Orders by the Madras High Court

Madras High Court supports three inventions by overturning three patent refusals on grounds of Lack of valid grounds (RTA-408 case), failure to consider inventive features (fluidized bed boiler case) and procedural error (fuel temperature control case). Continue Reading Review and Reversal of Patent Refusal Orders by the Madras High Court
February 21, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 203Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High Court"

Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High Court

Madras High Court overturned patent refusal for “Image Construction Apparatus” due to insufficient reasoning from the Controller regarding inventive step and Section 3(k). The Court criticized failure to consider the fact that the European Patent Office (EPO) had granted a patent based on the same prior art references and the disregard to analyze technical aspects per Section 3(k). Continue Reading Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High…
February 17, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 246Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court"

Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court

In this case the Delhi High Court set aside an order of the Controller of Patents refusing a patent application based on a ground not raised in the hearing notice. The refusal order was set aside as it lacked proper reasoning as required for inventive step analysis. Continue Reading Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court
February 14, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 434Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court. "

Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court.

In this case the Delhi High Court set aside an order of the Controller of Patents refusing a patent application. The refusal order was set aside as it lacked proper reasoning as required for inventive step analysis. Continue Reading Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court.
February 14, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 432Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Method of producing 'protein enriched blood serum' is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court"

Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court reviewed whether new objections can be raised at the hearing stage of a Patent Application. The Court examined the claims and the refusal order, from the purview of Principles of Natural Justice. Continue Reading Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court
February 13, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 357Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court

Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court

In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court clarifies the nature of product by process patent claims in the ferric carboxymaltose dispute between Vifor International and MSN Labs. Continue Reading Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court
February 8, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 376Views 0Like
Share

Read more