Adyasha Samal

Adyasha is a graduate from Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.

Patent

The Section 3(e) Soup: What Makes for Synergistic Effect?

by
14 Comments

Earlier this month, Pune-based home maker Shubhangi Patil was granted a patent over her unique ragi walnut soup mix composition (Edit: Application No. 201621034764). The mix claims to combine ragi (finger millet) and walnut to create a nutrient-rich substitute for non-vegetarian foods containing calcium, Omega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids which can be used to treat Vitamin B12 deficiency. According to the patentee’s statements to The Hindu’s Business Line, she invented the soup out of necessity owing to her husband’s health…


Read More »
Design Others Patent Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (December 14 – 20)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight India on TRIPS Waiver: Will WTO pass the test of humanity? Swaraj gave us an overview of India’s statement on the on-going TRIPS Waiver proposal, delivered at the WTO TRIPS General Council Meeting held from 16th-18th December, 2020. He explains that India strongly appealed to WTO’s responsibility to respond during this time of crisis and also pointed out that COVAX and ACT-accelerator were inadequate to meet global needs. India’s statement also indirectly calls out the hypocrisy in developed…


Read More »
COVID-19 Innovation Patent

COVID-19 Vaccines: Patent Ownership and the Barriers to Equitable Access

by
7 Comments

The race to develop vaccines for COVID-19 has edged closer to its finishing line with at least three candidates announcing positive results from their vaccine trials. While this may appear to be the light at the end of the tunnel, the focus now shifts towards equally challenging issues of availability, accessibility, and affordability of vaccines. In this post, I discuss the vaccines developed by Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca-Oxford, the complex ownership status of their intellectual property, the bilateral pre-purchase deals…


Read More »
COVID-19 Patent

Dapagliflozin Injunction Denied: Of Double-Patenting and Coverage-Disclosure Dichotomy

by
Leave a Comment

In a very notable recent order, AstraZeneca was denied an interim injunction by the Delhi High Court against Intas Pharmaceuticals and Alkem Laboratories (Defendants) in a case relating to the manufacture of anti-diabetic drug Dapagliflozin, which allegedly infringed AstraZeneca’s patents IN 205147 (IN ‘147) as well as IN 235625 (IN ‘625). The order has revealed what could turn out to be a case of double-patenting that has escaped scrutiny for 17 years! It also explores important questions regarding coverage-disclosure dichotomy…


Read More »
Geographical Indication Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (November 9 – 15)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight Amendments to the Copyright Act: Hidden Consultations and the Missing Public Angle of Copyright Law – Part I In the first of this two-part post, Nikhil discussed the consultation process initiated by the Copyright Office to amend the Copyright Act which happens to involve only industry stakeholders. He explains that these opaque, closed-door consultations are antithetical to the interests of open access, creativity, culture, and freedom of expression and might be paving the way towards the privatisation of…


Read More »
Trademark

Mountain Dew Trademark Battle: David v. Goliath or Misapplication of Prior User Rights?

by
Leave a Comment

PepsiCo has suffered a blow in its 16 year long legal battle to secure trademark rights for its famous soda, ‘MOUNTAIN DEW’. The Additional Chief Judge of the City Civil Court of Hyderabad has recently ruled that the Hyderabad-based Magfast Beverages enjoys prior user rights over an identical trademark for their packaged drinking water (‘PDW’) business. In this post, I discuss this order and certain other issues in the dispute that may require more attention. Facts The plaintiff Syed Ghaziuddin…


Read More »
Patent

Only ‘Disclosed’ if ‘Identified’: IPAB Quashes Ceritinib Patent Revocation

by
2 Comments

An IPAB bench consisting of Chairman Manmohan Singh J. and the new technical member for Patents Dr. B.P. Singh has quashed the Controller of Patent’s decision that revoked Novartis’s patent on the anti-cancer drug Ceritinib. It held that while the compound was contained in a broader genus patent, it was not ‘disclosed’ therein, as it hadn’t been specifically identified. The 104-page order examines several issues regarding novelty and obviousness, the extent of coverage and disclosure, and timelines for filing of…


Read More »
Copyright

IPAB to Fix Statutory Licensing Rate for Radio Royalties after 10 Years

by
Leave a Comment

In a significant development, the IPAB has passed an interim order maintaining status quo of the royalty rate for radio broadcasts under statutory licensing. This was followed by a Public Notice seeking suggestions from stakeholders with regard to the fixing of royalty rates by IPAB. Background Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957, which was added by the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012, empowers the Appellate Board to fix royalty rates for performances or radio or television broadcasts of literary and…


Read More »
Copyright Geographical Indication Others Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 20 – 27)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight University of Miami Wins Appeal at IPAB over Cancer Drug Patent ‘Coenzyme Q10 Formulations and Methods of Use’ Praharsh discussed the IPAB’s order allowing an appeal against the Controller of Patents’ rejection of the University of Miami’s application over a pharmaceutical composition for treatment of cancer. The Controller had rejected the application stating, among other things that: a) the additional documents submitted by the appellant to explain the post research scenario were grossly substantive and result of further…


Read More »
Copyright Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 14 – 20)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight A Tale of Two Sujatas: Delhi HC Reflects on Suppression of Material Facts and Clean Hands Doctrine Praharsh discussed Delhi HC’s recent order modifying an ex-parte interim injunction after finding that the plaintiff concealed material facts during the hearing. The Plaintiff, who used the registered mark ‘SUJATA’ under classes 7, 8, 9, 11, and 35 had obtained the injunction by concealing the fact that a director of the Defendant owned a similar mark ‘SUJATA’ under class 11 since…


Read More »
  1. Pages:
  3. 1
  4. 2
  5. 3
  6. 4
  7. 5