Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Madras High Court Upholds Patent Validity in Embio Limited vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals

Madras High Court Upholds Patent Validity in Embio Limited vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals

The Madras High Court dismissed Embio Ltd.’s petition challenging the validity of Malladi Drugs’ patent for a method of preparing chiral beta-amino alcohols. The court upheld the patent’s novelty, inventive step, and validity, citing superior yields and optical purity. Continue Reading Madras High Court Upholds Patent Validity in Embio Limited vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals

Read more

Patent Application Rejection Set Aside for Improper Citation of Withdrawn Prior Art

Patent Application Rejection Set Aside for Improper Citation of Withdrawn Prior Art

The Madras High Court, in CMA(PT) No. 33/2023, overturned the Patent Controller’s rejection of a patent application by Dr. Vandana Parvez and others. The Court held the order non-speaking and procedurally invalid, directing a fresh examination within six months and expunging prior art from the public domain. Continue Reading Patent Application Rejection Set Aside for Improper Citation of Withdrawn Prior Art

Read more

2024 IP Report Indicates Increase in Patent and Design Filings with India Among Key Contributors

2024 IP Report Indicates Increase in Patent and Design Filings with India Among Key Contributors

The 2024 World Intellectual Property Indicators report reveals a significant rise in global patent and design filings, led by contributions from key Asian economies, including India. India’s 15.7% increase in patent filings reflects a surge in domestic IP activity and aligns with global trends in computer technology and digital communication. Continue Reading 2024 IP Report Indicates Increase in Patent and Design Filings with India Among Key Contributors

Read more

Court restores patent application despite missed deadline to file request for examination

Court restores patent application despite missed deadline to file request for examination

The Delhi High Court restored Bry-Air’s patent application after finding the delay was due to the former patent agent’s negligence, not the petitioner’s actions. The court emphasized that applicants should not suffer due to agents’ faults and allowed Bry-Air to proceed with Form 18 submission for patent examination. Continue Reading Court restores patent application despite missed deadline to file request for examination

Read more

Delhi High Court Orders Restoration of Patent Lapsed Due to Communication Error of the Patent Office

Delhi High Court Orders Restoration of Patent Lapsed Due to Communication Error of the Patent Office

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Thijs, Roeland Michel Mathieu, ordering the restoration of Patent No. 408932 after it lapsed due to a communication error by the Patent Office. The court determined the lapse was not intentional on the appellant’s part and required the respondent to restore the patent upon payment of the renewal fee. Continue Reading Delhi High Court Orders Restoration of Patent Lapsed Due to Communication Error of the Patent Office

Read more

Methods for Antibody Production in Genetically Modified Animals are Patentable; they are not covered under Section 3(i) Exclusion

Methods for Antibody Production in Genetically Modified Animals are Patentable; they are not covered under Section 3(i) Exclusion

The Madras High Court has overturned the rejection of Kymab Limited’s patent application related to generating antibodies in non-human mammals. The Court found that the invention does not fall under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act, 1970, as it is not a method for treating animals but a process for producing antibodies using genetically modified animals. The patent is now set to be granted. Continue Reading Methods for Antibody Production in Genetically Modified Animals are Patentable; they are not covered…

Read more

Claim Amendments within the Scope of Patent Specification are Permissible, the Delhi High Court reiterates

Claim Amendments within the Scope of Patent Specification are Permissible, the Delhi High Court reiterates

The Delhi High Court overturned the Deputy Controller’s decision rejecting Axcess Limited’s patent application. The Court ruled that the amended claims were within the scope of the original application and remanded the case for fresh consideration, providing guidance on permissible amendments under the Patents Act, 1970. Continue Reading Claim Amendments within the Scope of Patent Specification are Permissible, the Delhi High Court reiterates

Read more

Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

This article analyzes India’s legal stance on the patentability of algorithmic processes under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970. Focusing on the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Blackberry Limited vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the post explores key arguments, legal precedents, and implications for software patents in India. Continue Reading Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

Read more

Section 3(j), Essentially biological processes and human intervention

Section 3(j), Essentially biological processes and human intervention

The Madras High Court remanded Sakata Seed Corporation’s patent application, focusing on the human intervention in biological processes under Section 3(j). The Court found that the Applicant’s arguments regarding human intervention were not sufficiently addressed by the Patent Office, leading to a fresh review of the case. Continue Reading Section 3(j), Essentially biological processes and human intervention

Read more

“Be mindful when exercising quasi judicial power, cryptic orders unacceptable”says Bombay High Court

“Be mindful when exercising quasi judicial power, cryptic orders unacceptable” says Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court orders a fresh review of Seiwa Kasei’s ‘PHYTOCUTICLE’ trademark application, challenging the Registrar’s refusal for lack of distinctiveness. Continue Reading “Be mindful when exercising quasi judicial power, cryptic orders unacceptable” says Bombay High Court

Read more

Connect with Us

BananaIP Counsels

No.40, 3rd Main Road, JC Industrial Estate, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore – 560 062.

Telephone: +91-76250 93758+91-80-49536207 | +91-80-26860414/24/34
Email: contact@bananaip.com

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes

© 2004-2024 BananaIP Counsels. All Rights Reserved.