Chat with us, powered by LiveChat

+91-80-26860424 / 34

Call Us Today

LinkedIn

Search
 

Patent Services Tag

BananaIP Counsels > Posts tagged "Patent Services"

Patent Invalidation in the US: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

This post was first published on July 18, 2014.

 

After studying citations from patents that were invalidated by US Judges, researchers from the London School of Economics commented, “Patent invalidation has a significant impact on cumulative innovation in the fields of computers and communications, electronics and medical instruments (including biotechnology). We find no such effect in fields involving drugs, chemicals or mechanical technologies.” Let us now take a look at why this discrepancy exists.

What is patent invalidation?

The Patents Act outlines circumstances under which a granted patent can be revoked on certain grounds.

Who is affected by this and how has this come to be?

Start-ups seem especially vulnerable to bad patent policy because they may not have the legal or the economic negotiating power to deal with big business. The researchers commented that when large patentees are involved, bargaining breakdown occurs and small firms are normally less capable of resolving disputes cooperatively, without resorting to the involvement of courts.

Claim Drafting – Transitional Phrases

This post was first published on July 17, 2014.

 

A transitional phrase is a part of the claim that connects the preamble and the body. The Transitional phrase determines as to whether a claim is “Open” “Partially Open” or “Closed.”

Open Claim

An Open claim includes additional unrecited elements i.e., if a claim, which is Open, recites elements A, B, C and D, then an article which includes elements A, B, C, D and E infringes the Open claim irrespective of the fact that the article has an extra element E which is not recited in the Open claim.

The term “comprising” in a claim makes the claim Open.

In, Gillette Co. v. Energizer Holdings, Inc., 405 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir 2005), a famous and much talked about case, the claim at issue recited “A safety razor blade unit comprising a guard, a cap, and a group of first, second and third blades. ” The accused infringing product included four blades. The court said that the word “comprising” makes the claim Open and hence, the scope of the claim encompasses all safety razors satisfying the elements set forth in the claim thus concluding that the accused product infringed the claim.

Salient Features of Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2011

This post was first published on March 15, 2011. The draft Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2011 have been notified for publication in the Gazette of India. Any objections or suggestions may be sent by email to chandni[dot]raina[at]nic[dot]in within 45 days from the date on which the official gazette, containing the notification, is made available to the public. This amendment rules have made it easier for patent applicants and practitioner by providing for online filing of documents. Following are the salient features of the amended rules. Electronically authenticated documents may be filed online. Individual applicants may file documents online without electronic authentication by duly...

Continue reading

Patent: Stem Cell Patent Debate Never Dies

This image depicts the technological advancement that is 'stem cell regeneration'. It depicts the harvesting of stem cells in a perti dish and their development into a human organ. But is this miracle patentable? Click on the image to read the full post.

 This post was published on May 2, 2011.   The debate with respect to genetic and stem cell patents is alive with the European Court of Justice's (ECJ) preliminary opinion in March. As per the opinion, embryonic stem cells are not patentable because use of totipotent stem cells amounts to use of human embryo for industrial or commercial purposes. As totipotent stem cells can develop into a human being and are derived from an embryo, they as per the opinion can be considered to be human embryo or based on manipulation of human embryo. This opinion was an interpretation of Article 6(2)...

Continue reading

A Patently Generic Win

This post was first published on April 23, 2012. In a landmark decision on a generic drug-maker’s ability to introduce a generic drug for uses not indicated on the branded product’s label, the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, a unit of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, in its patent litigation against Novo Nordisk over Caraco’s generic version of Prandin, repaglinide tablets, a blood glucose lowering drug. The drug in question, Prandin, generically known as repaglinide, is used for treatment of Type-2 diabetes. The drug is approved for three different uses, out of which Novo had valid patent on one....

Continue reading

Role of Third Parties in Patent Grant Process

This post was published on July 21, 2014.

 

The subject of today’s topic would probably leave a patent applicant feeling a bit like the reigns are slipping. A patent is not a piece of cake to acquire. The right owner of the invention be it an inventor or an applicant has to prove themselves beyond any doubt. It is the basic right of every individual to oppose the grant of any patent, in cases where such a grant would seem detrimental to a third party. Hence, it would be a justifiable opportunity for third parties to intervene in the procedure of patent grant.

Opposition

Under the Indian Patent Law, Opposition can be made twice during the life of a patent application. First is the Pre-grant representation under section 25(1) wherein any person may challenge the application for grant of a patent. Pre-grant opposition acts as a defensive shield to confirm the validity of patent applications before patents are granted. Post grant opposition under section 25(2) may be made only by any person interested at any time after the grant of patent but before the expiry of a period of one year from the date of publication of grant of patent.

Foreign Filing Intimation to Indian Patent Office

This image depicts the logo of the IP India Office. This logo is relevant because the post talks about the Foreign Patent Filing Intimation to Indian Patent Office. Click on the image to view full post.

This post was first published on July 10, 2012. Given the global nature of businesses today, it is not uncommon for a patent applicant to file patent applications in multiple countries for the same invention. Like many other patent offices, the Indian patent office imposes an obligation on the applicants to update the patent office with respect to foreign filings for substantially the same invention for which an application has been filed in India. The whole idea is to benefit from the opinion of the foreign patent office and to ensure that no frivolous patents are granted in India. Section 8 of...

Continue reading

Intellectual Property Protection for Computer Programs – Part I

This post was first published on 28th August, 2014.   A computer program is an intellectual creation and can be protected by Intellectual Property (IP) Law, particularly by Copyright and Patent Laws. The manner of IP protection for computer programs is a hot topic of debate, primarily due to the fact that current IP regimes are not effective in dealing with their protection comprehensively. There is a lot of ambiguity with regard to their protection because of the technical complexities in computer programs and the difficulty in integrating them with existing IP laws. Software does not fit comfortably into established legal categories. For instance, there is a lot of...

Continue reading

Patent Filing Essentials

This post was first published on 17th July, 2014.   When an individual is struck with an idea and an invention follows, it is advisable for them to gain monopoly over the invention's marketing rights via patent protection through relevant authorities. This write up briefly summaries the essentials of patent filing and protection. What is an Invention? An invention is a technological advancement that is not anticipated by publication in any document or used anywhere in the world including the country of the invention, before the date of filing of the patent application i.e., the subject matter of the invention should not have fallen in the public domain nor...

Continue reading

Delhi HC Interprets the Date of Grant of Patent

The image depicts the text 'Delhi High Court'

This post was first published on 27th April, 2012.   On request of one of our followers, we have revised the blog post titled, "Delhi HC Interprets the Timeline for Pre-grant Representation of a Patent" posted on 24th April. An important and essential question that came up before this Court in the case of Dr. (Miss) Snehlata Gupte vs Union Of India & Ors. was regarding when a patent is said to be granted under the Patents Act, 1970 (“Act”). In this case, the Court examined petitions having similar issues regarding when the patent was granted by the Controller and whether a...

Continue reading
Speak with an IP Expert Today
close slider
css.php