The Indian Patent Office has called for applications for the post of Scientific Advisors to assist Courts in patent infringement suits or any proceeding under the Patents Act (Section 115, Rule 103). Applicants must be:
- Those with a degree in science, technology, engineering or equivalent
- With 15 years of practical or research experience and
- Must hold or have held a “responsible post” in a scientific or technical department of the Central or State government or in any organization.
The last date for receipt of completed applications is November 30, 2009.
SpicyIP thanks Mr.Biju K.Nambiar of Majumdar and Co. for bringing this information to our notice.
this is one of the very important steps that patent office/courts have taken. in my comment abt 5-6 month’s ago (ever since tarceva judgment db of delhi hc), i had advocated for courts to requently seek help of scientific advisors in such matters, at least till they learn the ropes sufficiently.
i am very happy at this development. but just hope the hc ‘actually’ seek their assistance by overcoming their ‘omniscient’ frame of mind.
That is a very neat idea. I wonder if something like that would help in the US, where the judges hearing patent cases often don’t have technical backgrounds.
Once India starts to use these assistants, I hope to read on here about how it works out.
dear goldenrail,
well, the lack of ip competence is less pronounced in your country than it is in india (i can vouch for it, from my experience gained from actual practice). the malady is far, far more deep-rooted here. indian patent jurisprudence/judges have still to mature. i vividly remember that while v were arguing for roche/osi before the division bench of the high court of delhi in the tarceva case (against cipla), v had pointed this issue of ‘scientific advisors’ out to the court (which even observed that, if needed, they won’t shy away from taking help from such experts), but nothing happenned. as is the open secret, everyone knows how fundamentally flawed is that judgment. the real problem is the ‘omniscient’ (v-know-it-all) bloated self-righteous attitude of the judiciary. may b, some mental block. it is these factors that have to be overcome by the judiciary.
i really dont know the data regarding the number of infringement cases where courts have actually used the provision for appointment of scientific advisors under section 115, rule 103 of the indian patents act, but my fair guess would be that it should be near to nil. n the root of the problem lies in the afore-mentioned attitude.
The Fact being so far.. that no Scientific Adviser have been selected or there is no list as such maintained by the IP Office. I really wonder in the meantime Can a Controller of Patents can act as a Scientific Adviser