Case Reviews Archives

Victory for Novozymes: Madras High Court Overrules Patent Office’s Refusal

The Madras High Court, in a decision dated March 19, 2024, set aside a patent refusal order issued by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs in the case of a patent application filed by Novozymes A/S. This post summarizes the decision of the court in this case. Continue Reading Victory for Novozymes: Madras High Court Overrules Patent Office’s Refusal

May 27, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 562Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Court says infringing brand ‘Double Kabooter’ Jaa Jaa Jaa

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Anuj Bindal, the prior user of ‘Dabal Kabooter Brand,’ in a trademark dispute against ‘Double Kabooter Brand.’ This case highlights the importance of prior use and the implications of false statements in trademark applications. Continue Reading Court says infringing brand ‘Double Kabooter’ Jaa Jaa Jaa

May 23, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 426Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Snack Wars: Haldiram’s Battle for Brand Supremacy

Delhi High Court upholds Haldiram’s trademark rights, awarding Rs. 50 lakhs in damages and recognizing ‘HALDIRAM’ as a well-known mark in a legal battle against unauthorized use. Continue Reading Snack Wars: Haldiram’s Battle for Brand Supremacy

May 22, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 593Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Cancerous Battle: Novartis and NATCO clash over Eltrombopag

In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court overturned an injunction against Natco, allowing them to produce a generic version of Novartis’s cancer drug. The Court held that Novartis’s patent on a specific salt form of the drug (ELT-O) lacked novelty due to its coverage in an earlier patent (IN’176). Continue Reading Cancerous Battle: Novartis and NATCO clash over Eltrombopag

May 20, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 1041Views 2Likes

ShareFacebook

The Court refuses to remove names of Trademark Officers from the order

In this review petition filed before the Delhi High Court, the Court rejected the plea filed by the Trademark Officer to remove their names from the order. Continue Reading The Court refuses to remove names of Trademark Officers from the order

May 17, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 518Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Sufficiency of Disclosure – Ericsson vs Lava – Part X

This post dissects the Sufficiency of Disclosure aspect in the Ericsson Vs. Lava case, scrutinizing the court’s assessment of Ericsson’s patents’ validity under Sections 64(1)(h) and 64(1)(i) of the Patents Act. Drawing from legal precedents and patent law, the analysis highlights how the court deemed Ericsson’s patents to meet the requirements, ultimately dismissing Lava’s grounds for revocation. Continue Reading Sufficiency of Disclosure – Ericsson vs Lava – Part X

May 16, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 525Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Lights out for “Everyday” Lighters : Injunction in favour of EVEREADY

The Delhi High Court has restrained KSC Industries from using the mark “Everyday” for lighters, finding it deceptively similar to Eveready’s well-known trademark for batteries and lighting products. Continue Reading Lights out for “Everyday” Lighters : Injunction in favour of EVEREADY

May 15, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 488Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

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

May 14, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 445Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Novelty and Inventive Step analysis (Part B) – Ericsson Vs. Lava – Part IX

This post covers the intricate legal analysis of Ericsson’s patents essential for 3G and EDGE standards, dissecting novelty and inventive step aspects. Delve into the court’s scrutiny of prior art arguments and its decision on each patent’s validity. Continue Reading Novelty and Inventive Step analysis (Part B) – Ericsson Vs. Lava – Part IX

May 13, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 615Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Novelty and Inventive Step analysis (Part A) – Ericsson Vs. Lava – Part VIII

This analysis examines the novelty and inventive step of the first five patents (IN 203034, IN 203036, IN 234157, IN 203686, IN 213723) in the Ericsson vs. Lava patent case. Part A focuses on patents related to Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) speech codec technology (IN 203034, IN 203036, IN 234157). Continue Reading Novelty and Inventive Step analysis (Part A) – Ericsson Vs. Lava – Part VIII