Blog

“The best way to predict the future is to invent it” – Alan Kay Introduction To get a patent over an invention, an inventor must apply for the patent as per the jurisdictional laws. In India, patents are governed by the Indian Patent Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”). Generally, every invention has its […]

Introduction In a significant ruling on design infringement, the Bombay High Court recently granted an ad-interim injunction to Pidilite Industries, effectively restraining Astral Limited from using containers that were found to be deceptively similar to Pidilite’s registered M-SEAL PV SEAL containers. This blog will delve into the details of the case, examining the court’s decision […]

Introduction On July 9, 2024, in F-Hoffmann-La Roche Ag & Anr v. Zydus Lifesciences Limited [1], the Delhi High Court issued a temporary injunction preventing Zydus Lifesciences from selling its breast cancer drug, Sigrima. This biosimilar of Roche’s Pertuzumab (marketed as Perjeta®) became the center of a patent infringement lawsuit initiated by Roche against Zydus […]

Introduction In a significant ruling on July 30, 2024, in Star Scientific Limited v. The Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court overturned the decision of the Controller of Patents and Designs, which had refused the grant of a patent to Star Scientific Limited. The Court held that the mere non-attendance of a […]

Introduction Madras High Court’s recent decision in Genmab A/S v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs clarifies the interpretation of Section 3(c) of the Indian Patent Act for synthesized non-living substances, especially monoclonal antibodies. This judgment provides a detailed explanation of why establishing the novelty or the technical advancement of an invention is a must […]

Introduction In a recent judgment dated March 19, 2024, in Genomatica Inc vs Controller of Patents and Designs, the Madras High Court overturned a patent refusal order issued by the Controller in respect of patent application No. 201747013084, in which the Controller had rejected the latest amendments to the pending claims, instead opting to examine […]

Introduction The Rule 137 of the Indian Patent Rules provides discretionary powers to the Controller to condone any irregularity in procedure for complying with the requirements of Indian Patent Acts and Rules. In a recent judgment of the Madras High Court dated April 4, 2024, in the case of R. Vishnu Prasad v. Controller of […]

Introduction In a recent judgement dated May 14, 2024, in Alimentary Health Limited vs. Controller of Patents and Design[i], the Delhi High Court set aside a patent refusal order issued by the Indian Patent Office in respect of Indian patent application 3989/DELNP/2012, which had been denied, stating that the invention lacked an inventive step and […]

Introduction In a recent judgment dated February 23, 2024, in Mitsui Chemicals Inc. vs Controller of Patents [1], the Delhi High Court set aside a patent refusal order issued by the Controller in respect of patent application No. 3877/DELNP/2009, which had been denied on the grounds of non-compliance with Sections 59 and Section 3(h) of the […]

Introduction The High Court of Delhi recently issued a significant decision in the case of InterDigital Technology Corporation & Ors. vs. Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd. & Ors. [1], which has substantial implications for patent litigation involving Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and the Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. It addresses critical issues such […]