+91-80-26860424 / 34

Call Us Today

LinkedIn

 

Prior Art Tag

BananaIP Counsels > Posts tagged "Prior Art"

Non-Obviousness and the Trilogy

This image depicts a Gavel, a hammer which is used by a Judge to get attention. This image is relevant as the articles deals with the famous 'Trilogy' theme in the area of patent. Click on the image for more information

This post was first published on 5th December, 2014.   The Supreme Court's non-obviousness precedent commenced with Graham v. John Deere Co., and its companion cases, Calmar v. Cook Chemical and United States v. Adams, collectively referred to in patent circles as the Trilogy. This trilogy represents the Supreme Court’s first interpretation of the statutory non-obvious requirement. The principal issue in the trilogy was establishing the level of ingenuity necessary to satisfy the Section 103 non-obvious requirement that had been added to the Patent Act in 1952. The decision in Calmar offered a detailed description of prior art and the differences between the claims at issue and the...

Continue reading

The TSM Test and Non-obviousness

This image depicts two dolphins jumping high over the sea with the sunset in the Background. This image is relevant as it deals with TSM test which is the Teaching, Suggestion and Motivation test. Click on the image for more information.

This post was first published on 6th December, 2014.   TSM test is the Teaching, Suggestion and Motivation test. It simply means, when analysing the obviousness of an invention while comparing it with prior art, these are the three questions that have to be asked: Is the prior art quoted instrumental in teaching the reader the method of producing the invention? Does the prior art or any of its contents suggest any method of producing the invention in question? Does the prior art talk about problems related to a particular technology motivating an invention in a particular manner? It must be well understood by now that...

Continue reading

Informed Prior Art Analysis for Traditional Knowledge Based Inventions

The image depicts traditional medicine.

This post was first published on November 26th, 2012. Prior art forms the core of novelty and inventive step analysis and also plays an important role in the assessment of other requirements. For negating novelty, the basic principle is: all elements of an invention must be present in a single prior art, expressly or inherently, supplemented by knowledge of a skilled artisan. For making an invention obvious, a combination of prior art elements that form part of the invention must be obvious to a person skilled in the art. The role of prior art is quite straight forward, it must directly,...

Continue reading

Designing Around Designs

The featured image shows a bunch of black pencils with the word Design written in the background in black and bold letters. The post is regarding designs. To know more click here.

This post was first published on February 14, 2010.   In furtherance of our posts with respect to patent infringement analysis, I would like to hereby write a note on analysis of design infringement and steps to be taken for designing around designs. Design infringement analysis and strategy for designing around registered designs assumes importance in the light of an increase in design protection in fashion, furniture, toys and other industries. While it is important for a designer to protect his designs, it is also equally important for him to ensure that his designs do not infringe on designs protected by others. Rights...

Continue reading

Amendments to a PCT Application under Article 19 and Article 34

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

In an event where an applicant wishes to make certain changes in only the claims of a direct PCT application, the applicant can invoke the procedure under Article 19. The applicant can only amend the claims under Article 19. The applicant cannot amend the description or the  drawings. There are certain conditions for filing an amendment under this Article. The application must be filed within 2 months from the issuance of the International Search Report and no new matter can be added.  No demand or fees is required to be filed under this Article for the amendments in the claims. It...

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