-
Continue reading →: Positive Ruling for Godrej by Bombay High Court
In a writ petition by Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company vs. The Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs, the High Court of Bombay held that the decision of the Patent office to remove Godrej’s patent from the registered of patent was hyper technical and extreme. The Court ruled that it…
-
Continue reading →: Notifications under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act declared legally untenable
454 petitions were filed against the 344 Notifications dated 10th March, 2016 of the Government of India, all in exercise of power under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (Drugs Act) prohibiting the manufacture, distribution and sale in the territory of India of drugs 344 Fixed Dose…
-
Continue reading →: Section 24(5) declared void
Section 24(5) of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, has been declared void by the Delhi High Court. Prabhat Agri Biotech Ltd, Nuziveedu Seeds (P) Ltd and Kaveri Seed Company Ltd. challenged the vires of Section 24(5) of the Protection of Plant Varieties & Farmers’ Rights…
-
Continue reading →: NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY ACT: ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
An IP stakeholders meeting was held on 14th December 2016 at Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi. Upon the request by the government, Anand and Anand made a short note with regard to the NBA related patent issues along with the recommendations. The note is being reproduced below for purpose of dissemination…
-
Continue reading →: Dolby sues Oppo and Vivo
Dolby has sued two Chinese phone manufacturers, Oppo and Vivo, at the Delhi High Court stating that the two companies are using Dolby’s SEPs without a license. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held the following: – That Oppo and Vivo shall deposit royalty with the Court @ INR 34…
-
Continue reading →: Cancer drug (Enzalutamide) Patent application refused
5 Oppositions were filed against Indian patent application No. 9668/DELNP/2007 covering the drug product Enzalutamide and the same have been decided by Controller Umesh Chandra Pandey in an order dated 8th November 2016. The Controller has refused the application and held that the invention though is novel however the same lacks…
-
Continue reading →: Etanercept applications granted by the IPO
Controller Nilanjana Mukherjee on 7th November 2016 allowed two applications of Pfizer Ireland (2315/DELNP/2007 (IN 2315) and 2317/DELNP/2007 (IN 2317)) covering their commercial method for production of Etanercept, dismissing Oppositions filed by Biocon Ltd. (1,2), and Mylan Laboratories Ltd (1,2). The claims currently on record in respect of Indian patent…
-
Continue reading →: IPO REJECTS PATENT APPLICATION FOR RELATING TO ATOMIC ENERGY
In a decision given by the Kolkata patent office for Applicant Merck and CIE, the IPO refused the patent application for falling within the ambit of invention relating to atomic energy. Section 4 of the Indian Patents Act reads as follows: “Inventions relating to atomic energy not patentable. -No patent…
-
Continue reading →: Delhi DB raises the bar of burden of proof on the Defendant to establish a credible challenge
A bench comprising of Justice BD Ahmed and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva recently passed an order granting an injunction in a patent matter. The DB reversed an order of Justice Manmohan Singh who had denied the injunction. The Court has also hinted at a presumption of validity of the patents holding…
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.
