Tag: Section 3(d)

Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates

Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates Featured image for Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates

The Madras High Court overturned a patent refusal in Signal Pharmaceuticals vs. Deputy Controller of Patents, citing a lack of reasoning in the rejection order. The Court observed that the Patent Office failed to address the applicant’s arguments, disregarded amended claims, and provided no justification for the refusal under Section 2(1)(ja) and Section 3(d) of the Patents Act. The case was remanded for reconsideration, reinforcing the necessity of well-reasoned patent orders.

Read more about Reasoned orders are a necessity in patent refusals, Madras HC reiterates

Madras High Court Overturns Patent Refusal under section 3(d), Reiterates Importance of Reasoned Orders and Natural Justice

Madras High Court Overturns Patent Refusal under section 3(d), Reiterates Importance of Reasoned Orders and Natural Justice Featured image for Madras High Court Overturns Patent Refusal under section 3(d), Reiterates Importance of Reasoned Orders and Natural Justice

The Madras High Court overturned the Controller’s refusal of Intervet International’s patent application, underscoring the importance of natural justice and reasoned orders in patent proceedings. The case involved complex issues under Sections 3(d) and 3(e) of the Patents Act, with the Court remanding the matter for reconsideration.

Read more about Madras High Court Overturns Patent Refusal under section 3(d), Reiterates Importance of Reasoned Orders and Natural Justice

A doped order on method of doping, court clarifies

A doped order on method of doping, court clarifies Featured image for A doped order on method of doping, court clarifies

The Madras High Court confirmed the Patent Office’s rejection of IIT Madras’s patent for a method of doping potassium into ammonium perchlorate. The Court agreed with the rejection based on Sections 3(d) and 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, but noted procedural shortcomings in the handling of the case.

Read more about A doped order on method of doping, court clarifies

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

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

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

Cancerous Battle: Novartis and NATCO clash over Eltrombopag

Cancerous Battle: Novartis and NATCO clash over Eltrombopag Featured image for 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).

Read more about Cancerous Battle: Novartis and NATCO clash over Eltrombopag

Patentability and Section 3(d), History of Patent Law in India, Patentability of Imatinib Masylate in Beta Crystalline Form – Novartis Case Abridged by Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala

Patentability and Section 3(d), History of Patent Law in India, Patentability of Imatinib Masylate in Beta Crystalline Form – Novartis Case Abridged by Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala Featured image for Patentability and Section 3(d), History of Patent Law in India, Patentability of Imatinib Masylate in Beta Crystalline Form – Novartis Case Abridged by Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala

This abridged version of the Novartis case was used by Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala to explain to the students of UPES, the patentability requirements under the...

Read more about Patentability and Section 3(d), History of Patent Law in India, Patentability of Imatinib Masylate in Beta Crystalline Form – Novartis Case Abridged by Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala