Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court

Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court Featured image for Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court

In this case the Delhi High Court set aside an order of the Controller of Patents refusing a patent application based on a ground not raised in the hearing notice. The refusal order was set aside as it lacked proper reasoning as required for inventive step analysis.

Read more about Refusal of a patent application based on prior art not cited in hearing notice set aside by the Delhi High Court

Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court.

Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court. Featured image for Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court.

In this case the Delhi High Court set aside an order of the Controller of Patents refusing a patent application. The refusal order was set aside as it lacked proper reasoning as required for inventive step analysis.

Read more about Inventive Step analysis requires a rigorous examination, not surface analysis, says the Delhi High Court.

Trademark opposition timelines are mandatory, and must be complied strictly, says the Delhi High Court

Trademark opposition timelines are mandatory, and must be complied strictly, says the Delhi High Court Featured image for Trademark opposition timelines are mandatory, and must be complied strictly, says the Delhi High Court

In this case, the Delhi High Court explored if a trademark opposition be ‘deemed as abandoned’ if there was a delay in service of evidence by the opponent in the opposition. The Court also explained whether the timelines mentioned in the Trade Marks Act and Rules are mandatory or not.

Read more about Trademark opposition timelines are mandatory, and must be complied strictly, says the Delhi High Court

Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court Featured image for Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court reviewed whether new objections can be raised at the hearing stage of a Patent Application. The Court examined the claims and the refusal order, from the purview of Principles of Natural Justice.

Read more about Method of producing ‘protein enriched blood serum’ is not a method of treatment under Section 3(i), says the Delhi High Court

‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’ , and ‘Raashee’, Trademark Case Decisions

‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’ , and ‘Raashee’, Trademark Case Decisions Featured image for ‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’ , and ‘Raashee’, Trademark Case Decisions

Recent trademark rulings by the Delhi and Bombay High Courts address infringement and damages in cases involving ‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’, and ‘Raashee’ trademarks.

Read more about ‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’ , and ‘Raashee’, Trademark Case Decisions

Where can you file Trademark Rectification Petitions? The Delhi High Court refers the question to a Larger Bench

Where can you file Trademark Rectification Petitions? The Delhi High Court refers the question to a Larger Bench Featured image for Where can you file Trademark Rectification Petitions? The Delhi High Court refers the question to a Larger Bench

Delhi High Court refers the question of filing jurisdiction for trademark rectification petitions to a larger bench, seeking clarity on whether it’s limited to the trademark office’s jurisdiction or any High Court.

Read more about Where can you file Trademark Rectification Petitions? The Delhi High Court refers the question to a Larger Bench

Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court

Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court Featured image for Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court

In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court clarifies the nature of product by process patent claims in the ferric carboxymaltose dispute between Vifor International and MSN Labs.

Read more about Product by Process Patent Claims are Product Claims, not Process Claims, rules the Delhi High Court

Use of Akshay Tanna’s persona and reputation on social media for investment scams taken down

Use of Akshay Tanna’s persona and reputation on social media for investment scams taken down Featured image for Use of Akshay Tanna’s persona and reputation on social media for investment scams taken down

The Delhi High Court has mandated the takedown of fraudulent social media activities exploiting Akshay Tanna’s reputation for investment scams

Read more about Use of Akshay Tanna’s persona and reputation on social media for investment scams taken down

Court refuses injunction against Bhanushali’s “Main Atal Hoon”

Court refuses injunction against Bhanushali’s “Main Atal Hoon” Featured image for Court refuses injunction against Bhanushali’s “Main Atal Hoon”

Denial of injunction for ‘Main Atal Hoon’ by Bombay High Court clarifies legal stance on film adaptations of public domain subjects and copyright disputes.

Read more about Court refuses injunction against Bhanushali’s “Main Atal Hoon”