Madras High Court Archives

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 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 329Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

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 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 536Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

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 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 466Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Image accompanying blogpost on "Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court."

Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.

“Chand” textile trademark owner loses infringement case against “Chand-A” lungi brand. Court finds long, honest, concurrent use by defendant since 1952 prevents confusion. Lack of concrete evidence weakens plaintiff’s claim of permissive use. Court outlines principles for proving honest and concurrent trademark use. Continue Reading Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.

February 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 734Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

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 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 607Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Madras High Court Rulings on Patent Application Refusals

In this post, we examine recent Madras High Court rulings that have overturned patent application refusals. These cases, involving complex topics such as immunological targeting, drug delivery formulations, and polynucleotide libraries, highlight the Court's stance on the necessity for clear and cogent reasoning in patent application rejections. Case Notes Rejection of claim amendments under Section 59 without reasons is not valid, says the Madras High Court. In a case involving a patent application relating to "Immunological Targeting of Pathological Tau Proteins",…

January 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 626Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Madras High Court’s Progressive Stance on Patent Claim Amendments and Other Aspects

In this post, we at BananaIP bring to you select Patent cases relating to Patent Claim amendments, Patent exclusions, and Patent orders. Amending polypeptide patent claims mentioning specific sequence IDs to polynucleotide claims mentioning the said sequence IDs is permitted, says Madras High Court. While dealing with the rejection of a patent application based on impermissible claim amendments, the Madras High Court reiterated that claim amendments are permissible as long as the amendments are disclosed in the specification. After reviewing the…

January 2, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 730Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Key Judgments on Movie Rights Assignments from Madras High Court | BananaIP Counsels' Insights

Key Judgments on Movie Rights Assignments from Madras High Court | Case Notes

In the world of cinema, especially in a country as diverse and film-centric as India, the legal intricacies surrounding movie rights play a significant role in the industry's functioning. From satellite rights to digital rights, the manner in which these rights are assigned or transferred often leads to disputes, necessitating clarity from the judiciary. Here at BananaIP Counsels, we bring to you a collection of recent judgments from the Madras High Court that shed light on such complexities, specifically in…

August 28, 2023 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Copyrights, Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law 0Comment 1069Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows – PhonePe' vs 'DIGIPE' - Madras High Court grants interim relief to the plaintiff PhonePe Private Limited, the plaintiff, has been in the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) business since 2016. DigiPe Fintech Private Limited, the defendant filed an application for registration of the mark "DIGIPE" in September 2022 even after being issued a legal notice by PhonePe. The Madras High Court has temporarily restrained defendant from using its mark 'DIGIPE' following a trademark infringement…

January 7, 2023 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 1259Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Can a delay in filing request for examination be condoned? Court clarifies

Missed filing a request for examination? court says, condonable under exceptional circumstances.

Facts of the case: The Petitioner in this case filed two writ petitions challenging the order of the Respondent (herein referred to as Patent Office) dated 03.05.2016 in respect two of the Petitioner’s applications bearing numbers 8846/CHENP/2011 & 8907/CHENP/2011. The patent applications were filed before the Indian patent office on 29.11.2011 and 30.11.2011 respectively as PCT national phase entries. The petitioner engaged the services of a New York based firm called Greenberg Traurig for filing and prosecution of the national phase…

November 15, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 1414Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

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

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

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

Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says 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 Rulings on Patent Application Refusals

Madras High Court’s Progressive Stance on Patent Claim Amendments and Other Aspects

Key Judgments on Movie Rights Assignments from Madras High Court | Case Notes

Weekly Trademark Updates

Missed filing a request for examination? court says, condonable under exceptional circumstances.

Connect with Us

BananaIP has been acknowledged as a women-owned enterprise, certified by WEConnect International.

Connect with us