Pre-grant patent opposition in India

A Pre-Grant opposition in India is clearly explained in Section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 which deals with the Pre-Grant Opposition proceeding. It explains the meaning, grounds and procedure for initiating an opposition proceeding in India. ‘Opposition’ is a word commonly heard and loosely used. The word in itself is an expression which symbolizes disagreement or unacceptance. An Opposition Proceeding in India is an administrative process which enables third parties to challenge the…


The Bridge to India- The Guidelines bridging the gap

The whispers have been incessant since the announcement of the Bilateral Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programme between the Indian Patent Office (IPO) and the Japan Patent Office (JPO), which commenced officially on November 21, 2019, by signing a Joint Statement of Intent (JSOI) to this effect in New Delhi. While aspiring applicants were flabbergasted on this homecoming move of the IPO the main question that remained in their minds was how this scheme would function. Clarifying the…


The Bridge to India- The potential of the recent PPH agreement

With the announcement of the Bilateral Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programme between the Indian Patent Office under the Controller General of Patents, Design and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) and the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the floodgates to investments and financing in India has opened opportunities beyond borders. The patent offices of these countries have inked an agreement for expeditious grant of patents to Indian entities and individuals. This initiative will initially commence on a pilot…


pharma-companies

Nei Patent ; Nei Infringement

The Plaintiff in the instant case- Novartis AG, had filed the present suit before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court against the defendant - Natco Pharma Ltd., seeking permanent injunction, damages, rendition of accounts and delivery up in respect to its granted patent, Indian Patent No. 276026. The Patent had been granted for a novel and inventive compound 'Certinib'; a drug invented for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Circumstances surrounding the dispute: Novartis filed for a patent…


Subtitle - Another Movie?

A million droplets make an ocean, similarly a small judgement/order makes a great precedent. This order by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, delivered on 28th September, 2019 pertaining to subtitles in movies, is one such droplet that will potentially open the floodgate for the entertainment and media law sector in India. Introduction A movie is the most classic way to express one’s emotions, feelings and sentiments. Everything is captured in one screen and within a fixed duration of time. A…


AI-nstine’s AI-dea?

Introduction Artificial Intelligence (AI) is recognized as a study of giving computers abilities of the human mind. Often, it is understood as computer technology that allows something to be done in a way that is similar to the way a human would do it. Recently, ‘DABUS (device for the autonomous bootstrapping of unified sentience)’, the AI invented by Stephen Thaler, created two patentable inventions which were filed with the Intellectual Property Offices of the United Kingdom, the United…


Trademark Pulse pulses the Deceptively similar Pulser

In this case, the Plaintiff had instituted a suit against the Defendant and his proprietorship for infringement of trademark, copyright, trade dress, layout, colour combination, get up of the Plaintiff’s trademark PULSE candies adopting the trademark PULSER along with a deceptively similar trade dress. The Plaintiff company is into the business of selling food, beverages, mouth fresheners, pan masala, tobacco and the Plaintiff company is also into hospitality, agro forestry, rubber thread and…


The battle of the ‘JABARDASTH’ vs ‘BAND BAJA BAARAAT’

On July 8, 2019 The Delhi High Court decided that a copyright infringement occurs when there is no ‘Originality’ under Section 13(3)(a) and Section 2(d) of the Copyright Act, 1957. This is an essential feature for any right claiming copyright infringement, and was missing in the subject matter before the court. To decide this, reliance was placed on two other cases- R.G. Anand v. M/s Deluxe Films and Ors., (1978) 4 SCC 118 and MRF limited v. Metro Tyres Limited, CS (COMM) 753/2017. In this…


architecture

No Moral Rights over Destruction of a Work: Delhi High Court

In the world of construction, an architect holds a remarkable position. Generally, an architect is often subjected to resentment, and faces multiple disputes when he or she tries to balance between the builders and the owners of the building. An architect quite often turns to be the ultimate decision maker on any project, a question then arises would that give, the architect, as the creator and legal ‘author’ of a building a ‘right to object’ to the modification or destruction of their work by…


Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

The IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board) recently held hearings for trademark matters in July 2019. The cause list was sent on a rather short notice, and came as a surprise to many advocates since the IPAB currently doesn’t have a technical member for trademarks, and therefore should not be hearing trademark matters under the law. We’ll be taking a look at this in closer detail in this post. As for a context, the IPAB is a quasi-judicial body which was set up to address issues of…