+91-80-26860414

Call Us Today

LinkedIn

Search
 

Patents

BananaIP Counsels > Patents (Page 7)

Laxmi Dutt Roop Chand Vs. Nankau

The image depicts the cover of the presentation with title of Patent Infringement Presentation by Dr. Kalyan C Kankanala

First Publication Date: 18th December 2009 In this case, the Appellant, Laxmi Dutt Roop Chand, was the patent holder of a patent relating to the process of manufacture of hollow wares, such as 'lotas', 'batwas', 'degchis', 'batlois' and so on. The Appellant filed a patent infringement suit against the Respondents, Nankau and others, claiming that their process of manufacturing hollow wares violates the patents held by the Appellant and prayed for a permanent injunction restraining the Respondents from manufacturing the hollow wares using the process. In response to the infringement suit of the Appellants, the Respondents claimed non-infringement and counter-claimed for...

Continue reading

Scope of Government Use Exemption in India

Characters are pulling a rope written PATENT on top as this article is about Indian Patent Law Basics

First Publication Date: 14th December 2009 In a recent case involving Chemtura Corporation, Union of India and Others, the Delhi Court interpreted the scope of government use exemption under Section 47 of the Patents Act. The patent holder in the case, Chemtura, filed a patent infringement suit against Union of India and others with respect to an invention concerning side bearing pad assembly and sought a temporary injunction during the pendency of the suit. The infringement action was filed against Government of India and a consortium that supplied the product falling within the scope of the Chemtura’s patent under a railway...

Continue reading

Bishwanath Prasad Radhey Shyam Vs. Hindustan Metal Industries

Characters are pulling a rope written PATENT on top as this article is about Indian Patent Law Basics

First Publication Date: 15th December 2009 This case can be considered to be the most important case in inventive step jurisprudence in India. Though the case was decided in 1978, the principles laid down in the case are followed even today and have been codified in the Indian Patent Act. The patent in the case related to a means for holding utensils for turning purposes . According to a preferred feature of the invention disclosed in the patent, the pressure end of the spindle was rotatably mounted and for that purpose it comprised an independent piece engaged by a hollowed end in...

Continue reading

Bajaj/TVS Litigation

The image depicts Bajaj Logo.

First Publication Date: 14th December 2009 The litigation between Bajaj and TVS, which was very widely reported in the news showed the value of patents for gaining business advantage. The case briefs with respect to the litigation between the parties have been provided hereunder for the reader’s benefit. The cases relate to grant of injunction by the Court. Bajaj Auto Vs. TVS Motor Company Bajaj Auto Ltd. ("Bajaj") acquired a patent with regard to an invention relating to the use of twin spark plugs for efficient combustion of lean air fuel mixture in small bore ranging from 45 mm to 70 mm internal...

Continue reading

Ex-parte injunction vacated due to lack of prima-facie case of infringement

The image depicts the sign board of the Delhi High Court.

First Publication Date: 9th December 2009 Asian Electronics Ltd v/s Jumbo Electric Company (Delhi High Court, 12th November, 2009) Facts of the case: Asian Electronics (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) is the holder of an Indian patent 193488, which talks about a kit for converting a fluorescent lighting fixture from inductive operation to electronic operation. The corresponding US patent can be seen here. The plaintiff stated that Jumbo Electric Company (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) was manufacturing and selling the identical conversion kits for lighting units with electronic blast operation embodying claims of the plaintiff’s patent and such a conversion unit...

Continue reading

Patentability of new form, use or property – Section 3(d)

The image depicts the cover of the presentation with title of Concepts related to Patentability by Somashekar Ramakrishna

First Publication Date: 11th December 2009 Section 3(d) of the Patents Act provides that mere Discovery of a new form or new use or new property of a known substance is not patentable. The discovery of a new form of a known substance will be patentable only if it results in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance. Salts, esters, ethers, polymorphs, metabolites, pure forms, particle size, isomers, mixtures of isomers, complexes, combinations and other derivatives of a known substance will be considered to be the same substance and are not patentable, unless they differ significantly in properties with...

Continue reading

USPTO’s NEW but probably an UNCONVINCING way to REDUCE backlog

This image depicts the logo of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) which is represented by the bald eagle sitting on a shield with the american flag on the shield. This image is relevant because this post talks about the effects of the USPTO filing system after an amendment at the European Patent Office. Click on the image to view full post.

First Publication Date: 9th December 2009 United States Patent and Trademark office, considered to be one of the best Patent offices to output better quality patents, has given a notice in the Federal register/Vol. 74, No. 227/Friday, November 27, 2009, regarding providing small entities to have an application accorded special status for examination. As detailed in the notice, the USPTO will accord special status for examination under the following conditions: (1) The application for which special status is sought is a nonprovisional application that has an actual filing date earlier than October 1, 2009, in which the applicant has established small entity status...

Continue reading

Who must pay for appointment of Scientific Advisors?: Vittal Mallya Scientific Research Foundation Vs. Indfrag Limited

The image depicts the Madras HC.

first Publication Date: 9th December 2009 The case related to infringement of a patent relating to a process concerning the double metal salt of HCA. During the pendency of the suit, the court ordered for the analysis of the processes of the product called Double Metal Salt of Hydroxycitric Acid of the parties in the case by the Department of Chemistry of IIT, Madras. The objective of the analysis was to check if the alleged infringer’s process was different from that of the patent holder. The Court ordered that the parties in the case have to bear the cost of the...

Continue reading

Can use of an invention in a movie infringe a patent?

The images depicts the earth from the space with the bottom glowing, as if on fire, as the post is about whether the use of inventions in movies violates patents

First Publication Date: 3rd December 2009 Global Findability has filed a patent infringement suit in a District Court of Columbia against Summit Entertainment claiming that the Science Fiction movie of Summit violates its US patent relating to Integrated information processing system for geospatial media. According to Global Findability, Summit's use of its patented technology in the movie, Knowing, amounts to patent infringement. Would such an use be infringement in India? Section 48 of the Indian Patents Act provides that a patent holder will have the exclusive right to make, use, sell, offer for sale and import a patented invention into India. If...

Continue reading

Patent and Public Domain Balance 2 – Patentability requirements

The image depicts encircled letters P and D.

First Publication Date: 8th December 2009 An invention will be eligible to get a patent only if it satisfies the patentability requirements, which are patentable subject matter, industrial applicability/utility, novelty, non-obviousness/inventive step and specification. The government uses the patentability requirements to verify the worthiness of an invention for patent grant. The patentability requirements are like filters arranged in succession as shown in the figure below. Figure - Kalyan's Patent Filter Model A patent will be granted over an invention only if it passes through all the filters. Grant of a patent is the cumulative effect of satisfaction of all the requirements. Analysis of...

Continue reading