The WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Traditional Knowledge aims to enhance patent system efficiency and transparency regarding genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Continue Reading Note on the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Associated Traditional Knowledge
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
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
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
Delhi High Court revives Dabur’s ODONIL MYSTIC ROSE trademark application, citing procedural lapses by the Trade Marks Registry in serving the notice of opposition. Continue Reading Lost in the Inbox? Delhi High Court Saves Dabur’s Trademark Application
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
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
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
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
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