In this week’s patent news and updates - Supreme Court restores order extending time limits indefinitely; Supreme Court asks Government why it is not invoking compulsory licensing provisions; US publishes infamous "Special 301 Report", places India on priority watch list; USPTO organizing series of free webinars on Industrial designs / design patents
Indian Patent Updates
Supreme Court restores order extending time limits indefinitely
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, i.e., April 27th restored its order from last year…
This post was first published on 18th May, 2014.
The 25th Special 301 Report of 2014 keeps India on the Priority Watch List and the USTR hopes to run an out-of-cycle review in Fall, after the New Indian Government is formed. After emphasizing on the need to balance Incentives for Innovation and Domestic issues in India, the Report puts forth the various concerns on the Patent System in India:
Patent Process
Commending the measures taken by the Indian Government, such as Digitization, Online Search & e-Filing…
This post was first published on 4th July, 2014.
Compulsory Licenses are licenses granted by the government or the patent office, irrespective of whether the patent holder gives consent to such a license. For most types of Compulsory Licenses, the granting authority fixes the royalty payable to the patent holder. Compulsory Licenses, with respect to patents, are of various types:
General Compulsory License – Granted for all types of inventions when certain predefined parameters are satisfied;
Compulsory License in National Emergency,…
This post was first published on 19th May, 2014.
Evergreening, known in the politically-correct-circles as “Life Cycle management” of a drug, is the concept of extending the exclusivity term rendered to a pharmaceutical patent through legal and business measures. Contrary to existing myths and notions, Evergreening does not stop an interested party from exploiting the invention of an expiring patent. It is purely a business strategy to introduce and position newer products (sometimes patented) into the market so as to prolong…
Is Section 3(d) an extension of the Inventive Step analysis?
The answer to this question can make a difference to the compliance of non-discrimination obligations under the TRIPs Agreement, and so it plays a significant part. Article 27.1 of the TRIPs Agreement reads as follows:
Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3, patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable…