Patent

|

Stricter Timelines and an ambiguous Form 27 part of the...

The Patent Rules, 2003 are proposed to be amended by Draft Rule 21 Sub-rule (2) and Sub-rule (3), Draft Rule 131 Sub-rule (2), and updated Form-27. Draft Rule 21 Sub-rule (2) reduces the high cost previously borne by applicants for the translation of priority documents. This Draft Rule restricts the requirement for submitting verified English translations of priority documents in accordance with Rule 51bis.1(e) of regulations under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). ...
|

Commercial working statement proposed to be overhauled ...

In its latest proposed amendments to the Patent Rules, 2003, the government of India has proposed to overhaul the antiquated Form 27 (which seeks details of the commercial working of patents), among other procedural clarifications. ...
|

The Patentability of Substances Occurring in Nature

Patents are granted for inventions that are new, include an inventive step and are capable of industrial application. An element of human contribution and “inventiveness” are required for patentability. The body of scientific knowledge received by any generation is a combination of invention and discovery, but there is a fine line between the two, and the distinction is not always clear. In this note, we examine the patentability of discoveries in Europe, the United States, and India to understand this distinction in the context of “naturally occurring substances”. ...
|

Patenting Antibodies in India

Over the years, a large number of patents have been granted for antibodies all over the world. The world is also seeing a shift towards biologic based drugs. Most of the top-selling drugs in 2018 were monoclonal antibodies with HUMIRA® leading the list. With the progress in the art and growing case law in this area, the criteria for patentability of antibodies are becoming increasingly strict, with restrictions on the scope of the claims. ...
|

Expert evidence is essential for a patent challenge

The Madras High Court earlier this year rejected a writ petition filed against a patent owned by Kibow Biotech Inc. for a dietary supplement that aids in the carrying out of the kidney function, for reasons, among others, that there was no expert evidence led to support the case. The validity of the patent was challenged primarily under Section 3(e) of the Patents Act, i.e., on grounds that it was “a substance obtained by a mere admixture resulting only in the aggregation of the properties of the components thereof or a process for producing such substance”....
|

Proposed amendments to Patent Rules 2003 impact examina...

The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry have issued draft rules to amend the Patent Rules, 2003 (available here: See). The following major changes have been proposed in these draft rules: ...
|

Usefulness and claim construction of nucleic acid seque...

Essenese Obhan, Managing Partner at Obhan & Associates, explores the two clauses that clarify how a nucleic acid sequence, without indication of a function, does not contain any technical information and is not a patentable invention. The key requirement of patentability is that the invention must be ‘capable of industrial application’; claim construction must be based on it being non-obvious and useful. These are the aspects studied to understand why nucleic acid sequences don’t fall in the the patentable category....
|

A blockchain of a proposal: Is the IPO changing?

Sumathi Chandrashekaran of Obhan & Associates looks into the possible implications of a recent tender regarding blockchain, artificial intelligence and machine learning, issued by the IPO. The changes that would come about as a result of these implementations would dramatically improve user experience of the IPO services. Here’s a closer look at what the impact would be at each stage of application and grant....
|

India SEP Litigation Update – Warning to implemen...

The first post trial SEP case, involving both patent and competition laws, has given SEP holders some relief. The Philips case involving its patents relating to DVD video players, offered an interesting and relevant platform for jurisprudence on cutting edge patent and anti-trust issues such as essentiality, standard setting, and exhaustion. This article discusses the facts of the case and the various reasons why the decision of the Delhi High Court is far from satisfactory and is likely to cause some heartburn to implementors....