-
Continue reading →: Delhi High Court Allows Auxiliary Claim Amendment at Appellate Stage in Albemarle Corporation Case
The Delhi High Court recently, in the case of Albemarle Corporation vs The Controller of Patents [C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 19/2022; decision dated July 7, 2025], allowed an interlocutory application seeking to introduce an auxiliary set of claims during the appeal against the refusal of patent application number 2897/DELNP/2012, entitled “Solvent Systems Having…
-
Continue reading →: Too Late to Amend? Delhi HC Says No: Natural Justice Requires Fair Chance to Respond
By Jigyasa Pareek The Delhi High Court in Dong Yang PC Inc. vs Controller of Patents & Designs [C.A. (COMM.IPD-PAT) 60/2024; decision dated July 1, 2025] underscored the significance of adhering to the principles of natural justice when adjudicating patent applications. The Appellant challenged the refusal of patent application number…
-
Continue reading →: What’s Not in the Order Doesn’t Count: Delhi High Court Rejects Post Facto Averments
By Jigyasa Pareek The Delhi High Court in its recent decision in the case of Marelli Europe S.P.A. vs Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs [C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 21/2024, decision dated April 16, 2025] set aside an order of refusal issued by the Controller. The Court held that the introduction of new…
-
Continue reading →: Expert Evidence Exclusion Error in ViiV Healthcare Case
By Jigyasa Pareek Considered evaluation of expert evidence and timely disposal of patent applications are two essential pillars of the Patents Act, 1970. With regard to the first pillar, patent law, by its very nature, is rooted in scientific and technological complexity and that is precisely why the framework of…
-
Continue reading →: From Claiming a Mouse to a Method of Making a Genetically Modified Mouse: Madras HC on Sections 3(b) and 59(1)
The Madras High Court in the case of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. vs Controller of Patents and Designs [(T)CMA(PT) No.191 of 2023] adjudicated the appeal challenging the refusal of patent application number 1554/CHENP/2013, entitled “Mice That Make Binding Proteins Comprising Vl Domains”. The Controller disallowed the proposed amendments for being outside…
-
Continue reading →: Calcutta High Court (Again) Upholds the Constitutional Validity of Section 53 of the Patents Act
By Jigyasa Pareek The 2002 amendment of the Patents Act, 1970 marked a significant overhaul of India’s patent framework. One of the key changes introduced by the amendment was the establishment of a uniform patent term of twenty years. This provision was introduced to comply with Article 33 of the…
-
Continue reading →: Foreign Grants Must Be Considered Especially When Cited Prior Art Overlaps, Says Madras High Court
In the case of Shaperon Inc vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs [(T)CMA(PT) No.46 of 2023], the Madras High Court highlighted that the grant of corresponding patents in other countries is a relevant factor that should be taken into consideration when assessing a patent application in India. In the…
-
Continue reading →: Patent Restoration Allowed Without Supporting Evidence, Delhi High Court Favors Liberal Approach
The Delhi High Court’s decision in the case of SPV Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. vs The Controller General of Patents and Designs [C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 41/2024], emphasizes the importance of adopting a liberal approach in considering timely filed applications for restoration of lapsed patents under Section 60 of the Patents Act, read with…
-
Continue reading →: Plant Variety Authority Issues Notice for Registration of Parental lines of Notified Extant Hybrids
The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPVFRA) issued a Public Notice (1 of 2025) on 29th May 2025. The notice pertains to the classification of applications for registration of parental lines of extant hybrids notified under Section 5 of the Seeds Act, 1966. The Registrar-General is currently…
-
Continue reading →: Delhi High Court’s Landmark Ruling in Philips vs. Sukesh Behl: A Decade-Long SEP Battle Settled
Recently, the Delhi High Court delivered a landmark judgment in three interconnected patent infringement suits in Koninklijke Philips N.V vs Maj (Retd) Sukesh Behl & Anr. [CS(COMM) 423/2016, CS(COMM) 499/2018, CS(COMM) 519/2018] [2025:DHC:1144], concluding a decade-long legal battle over the infringement of a Standard Essential Patent (SEP) in DVD technology.…
Greetings
Welcome to Patents Rewind, Anand and Anand’s Patents and Designs blog that offers you an Indian perspective on issues surrounding patent and design eligibility and enforcement through latest case law and developments in the Indian patents and designs landscape.
Let’s connect
Join us!
Stay updated with our posts.
Patents Rewind - An Anand and Anand Blog 