Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Image accompanying blogpost on "Transparency Triumphs : Patent Refusals must elucidate clear grounds"

Transparency Triumphs : Patent Refusals must elucidate clear grounds

The Delhi High Court recently ruled in favor of Calm Water Therapeutics LLC, highlighting the importance of transparent reasoning in patent refusal decisions. The Court’s observations underscored flaws in the Controller’s assessment, emphasizing the necessity of comprehensive reasoning behind such refusals. Continue Reading Transparency Triumphs : Patent Refusals must elucidate clear grounds

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Premier Injunction for the Premier League : Viacom knocks out IPL Pirates with Dynamic+ Injunction"

Premier Injunction for the Premier League : Viacom18 knocks out IPL Pirates with Dynamic+ Injunction

Viacom 18 Media Private Limited obtained a groundbreaking Dynamic + injunction from the Delhi High Court against rogue websites broadcasting pirated IPL matches. This legal victory ensures real-time protection of Viacom’s exclusive broadcasting rights. Continue Reading Premier Injunction for the Premier League : Viacom18 knocks out IPL Pirates with Dynamic+ Injunction

Read more

A battle of SMITHS. Who owns the rights over the word 'SMITH'?

A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

The Delhi High Court ruled in the case of A.O. Smith Corporation v. Star Smith Export Pvt. Ltd., dismissing the defendants’ plea in a trademark infringement dispute. The court upheld A.O. Smith’s claim, restraining the defendants from using marks ‘STAR SMITH’ and ‘BLUE DIAMOND,’ citing potential confusion and dishonest adoption. Continue Reading A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

Read more

Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

In a landmark ruling, the Delhi High Court settled a decades-long dispute over the ownership of the ‘FIELDMARSHAL’ trademark. Confirming PM Diesel’s prior and legitimate usage since 1963, the court dismissed Thukral Mechanical Works’ claim based on a later acquisition. This judgment underscores the critical importance of prior user rights in trademark disputes. Continue Reading Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

Read more

This image contains the following text: Mitsui Chemicals Inc. vs Controller of Patents. Section 3(h), Procedural adherence and Patent refusal.

Delhi High Court reverses Patent refusal, Highlights significance of procedural adherence in handling claims of PCT National phase applications.

The Delhi High Court, in a recent decision dated February 23, 2024, in Mitsui Chemicals Inc. vs Controller of Patents, overturned the patent refusal order issued by the Controller in respect of patent application No. 3877/DELNP/200. This decision underscores the significance of procedural adherence, especially in handling of claims during the national phase entry of PCT applications. Background/Facts Mitsui Chemicals (the Appellant) filed a PCT national phase application titled "Plant Disease and Insect Damage Control Composition and Plant Disease and Insect…

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits"

Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits

The Delhi High Court allowed an interlocutory injunction against the Defendants to restrict their use of the mark “TOWER” to manufacture and sell dry fruits. This Court stated that a defendant cannot determine the ambit of what constitutes “Plaintiff’s goods of interest”. Continue Reading Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "The Delhi High Court directs the Examiner to advertise the ‘Bharat’ mark after examining all the objections."

The Delhi High Court directs the Examiner to advertise the ‘Bharat’ mark after examining all the objections.

The Delhi High Court has sent a trademark application for the word “Bharat” with a device back to the examiner for re-evaluation. While a previous court order ruled the mark distinctive, it failed to address objections about potential genericness. This case highlights the importance of a thorough trademark examination process. Continue Reading The Delhi High Court directs the Examiner to advertise the ‘Bharat’ mark after examining all the objections.

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Patent refusal order set aside, matter remanded back for DeNovo consideration "

Patent refusal order set aside, matter remanded back for DeNovo consideration

The Delhi High Court has faulted the Patent Office for rejecting a patent application without adequate reasoning. The case involved a beverage can closure design, and the Controller’s decision lacked clarity and failed to address the applicant’s arguments effectively. The Court has sent the case back for a proper re-examination, highlighting the need for thoroughness in patent application reviews. Continue Reading Patent refusal order set aside, matter remanded back for DeNovo consideration

Read more