Delhi High Court | Decided: 13 April 2012 I.A. No. 18464/2011 in CS (OS) No. 1421/2005 Bench: Justice Manmohan Singh Citation: 2012 PTC DEL 50 380 | 2012 SCC Online Del 2092 | 2012 CTC IP 3 6 Background AstraZeneca UK Ltd. (plaintiff) was the registered proprietor of the trade mark MERONEM, used for pharmaceutical
AstraZeneca UK Ltd. v. Orchid Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Read More »
Madras High Court | O.S.A. Nos. 132 and 133 of 2010 | Decided on 4 October 2010 Coram: Justice Elipe Dharma Rao and Justice K.K. Sasidharan Background This dispute arose between two of India’s biggest two-wheeler manufacturers and it was not just about who copied whose technology. It was also about who gets to speak
The journey of a patent application in India does not end with filing. In many respects, it begins in earnest only when the Indian Patent Office issues what is formally known as the First Examination Report – the FER. For applicants who are new to the Indian patent system, the FER can appear daunting: a
Understanding the First Examination Report (FER) and How to Respond Read More »
Delhi High Court | Decided: 8 February 2011 W.P. (C) No. 801 of 2011 Bench: Justice S. Muralidhar Background Nippon Steel Corporation, a Japanese corporation with world-class technology in the field of medium-high grade steel, was engaged in intensive research and development in steelmaking and related engineering. On 9 February 2007, Nippon Steel filed an
The grant of a patent is not an automatic entitlement that follows from novelty or inventive step alone. Before any invention can be examined on those standard criteria, it must first clear a foundational threshold: it must constitute a patentable subject matter under Indian law. The Patents Act, 1970 draws this threshold with deliberate precision
Non-Patentable Subject Matter in India: A Complete Guide to Section 3 Read More »
O.S. No. 3 of 1999, decided on 17 May 2010 (Kerala High Court) Background Low Heat Driers Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated in 1987 and engaged in manufacturing drying equipment for agricultural produce, claimed to have developed a novel device for smoke drying of agricultural products, particularly ribbed rubber sheets. The invention was attributed to
Supreme Court of India | Civil Appeal No. 6718 of 2013 | Decided: 2 June 2014 Bench: Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar & Justice A.K. Patnaik Citation: AIR 2014 SC 2210 | (2014) 15 SCC 360 Background Dr. Aloys Wobben, a German scientist-engineer and one of the world’s largest manufacturers of wind turbines, held approximately 2,700
Dr. Aloys Wobben & Another v. Yogesh Mehra & Others Read More »
Artificial intelligence and software are transforming every sector of the economy – from drug discovery and autonomous vehicles to financial modeling and legal research. As these technologies generate increasingly sophisticated outputs, the question of whether they can be protected by patents has become one of the most contested and consequential debates in intellectual property law.
Patentability of AI and Software Inventions in India Read More »
Bayer Corporation v. Union of India through the Secretary, Writ Petition No. 1323 of 2013 (Bombay HC, 15 July 2014); AIR 2014 Bombay Background The petitioner, Bayer Corporation, is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Indiana, United States of America. As a result of its research and development activities, the petitioner
Novelty is the first and most fundamental criterion for patentability under Indian patent law. Before any question of inventive step, industrial applicability or statutory exclusion arises, the threshold question is always the same – is the invention new? If it is not, the inquiry ends there. No amount of technical sophistication, commercial significance or inventive
Novelty as a Criterion for Patentability in India Read More »