20 articles
In the case of Qualyst Transporter Solutions LLC v. The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Court dealt with a familiar patent prosecution problem. When a refusal…
In the case of Biotyx Medical Shenzhen Co., Ltd. v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court dealt with a familiar patent question: can an…
Delhi HC sets aside patent rejection for IV catheter, citing flawed inventive step analysis under Agriboard test and lack of reasoned decision.
In Croda Inc. v. Controller of Patents, the Delhi High Court emphasized procedural fairness and ruled that the non-disclosure of prior art in a hearing notice constitutes a…
The Madras High Court overturned a patent rejection due to improper citation of withdrawn prior art, directing a fresh examination. The case highlights the necessity for strict compliance…
The Delhi High Court upheld the refusal of a patent application for a portable vehicle management system, citing lack of inventive step over prior art. This case highlights…
The Delhi High Court set aside a patent refusal where the Controller relied on prior art not cited in the hearing notice. The decision underscores the importance of…
This post examines the Supreme Court’s non-obviousness trilogy and its interpretation of Section 103 in US patent law. Key concepts such as prior art and the standard of…
The TSM test is crucial for determining non-obviousness in patent law by evaluating whether prior art teaches, suggests, or motivates the invention. This structured approach ensures that only…
This post reviews an IPAB decision on whether combining known elements in switch gears meets the inventive step requirement in Indian patent law. The case clarifies the threshold…