The Delhi High Court, in Enviro Ambient Corporation vs Assistant Controller of Patents [C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 74/2024; decision dated August 3, 2026], set aside the refusal of patent application number IN201917020705, entitled “Carbon Dioxide Capture Device and Method”, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The Court found that the impugned order rejecting the application for lack of novelty and inventive step was unreasoned and failed to consider the Applicant’s submissions and the distinctions identified between the claimed invention and the cited prior art documents.

The Court observed that the order substantially reproduced the objections in the FER and the teachings of the cited prior art, and concluded, in a cursory manner, that the claimed invention lacked novelty in view of bald reference to document D1. Similarly, on inventive step, the Controller merely concluded without any analysis that a person skilled in the art (PSITA) would be motivated by documents D1 and D3-D6 to arrive at the claimed invention.

The Court reiterated that the Controller is required to follow the established five-step test laid down in F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. vs Cipla Ltd. and must consider the three elements discussed in Agriboard International LLC vs Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs. The Court emphasised that the analysis must examine the existing knowledge and how the identified PSITA would move from the existing knowledge to the claimed invention.

The Court further noted that the response to the FER and the written submissions contained detailed distinctions between the claimed invention and the cited prior art, supported by figures, as well as submissions concerning the manner in which the invention addressed drawbacks in existing carbon dioxide capture technologies. However, none of these submissions found consideration in the impugned order.

The Court held that “applications for inventions cannot be rejected in such a cursory or callous manner, as many of the genuine inventions may be beneficial in public interest” and found the instant matter fit for remand.