Author name: Prashant Reddy

T. Prashant Reddy graduated from the National Law School of India University, Bangalore, with a B.A.LLB (Hons.) degree in 2008. He later graduated with a LLM degree (Law, Science & Technology) from the Stanford Law School in 2013. Prashant has worked with law firms in Delhi and in academia in India and Singapore. He is also co-author of the book Create, Copy, Disrupt: India's Intellectual Property Dilemmas (OUP).

The absence of evidence in NATCO’s CL application for Nexavar

/ By / Uncategorized

There has been considerable world-wide interest over NATCO’s compulsory licensing application for Indian patent number 215758 i.e. Bayer’s patent for Sorafenib, which is marketed under the brand Nexavar. It’s the first such application post 2005 and is widely seen as the test case. Considering that the patent belongs to an American company it is likely that this issue will reverberate at the WTO. We had earlier blogged on this CL, over here and here. NATCO’s CL application is available over […]

The absence of evidence in NATCO’s CL application for Nexavar Read More »

DIPP invites suggestions on reforming the Patents & Trademarks office

/ By / Trademark

The Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP) has recently released a well-written, ‘discussion paper’ (available here), on the ‘Review of organizational structure of the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, Trade Marks and Geographical Indications’. This ‘discussion paper’ seeks to examine the steps that can be taken to enhance the efficacy of the patents & trademark offices and going by the issues raised in the paper, it does appear that the DIPP is open to making some

DIPP invites suggestions on reforming the Patents & Trademarks office Read More »

Delhi High Court passes ex-parte interim injunction against Symed Labs for alleged infringement of Indian Patent No: 221536

/ By / Uncategorized

In an extremely surprising order, Justice Sistani of the Delhi High Court passed an ex-parte interim injunction, on the 16th of September, 2011 against Symed Laboratories Ltd. in a lawsuit filed by Vifor (International) Ltd., a European Pharmaceutical Company for the violation of its Indian patent no. 221536. It must be noted that the patent has been granted to Vifor (International) AG i.e. the Swiss parent company and not Vifor (International) Ltd, which is the entity that has filed the

Delhi High Court passes ex-parte interim injunction against Symed Labs for alleged infringement of Indian Patent No: 221536 Read More »

Guest Post: Taking a closer look at the Nexavar litigation

/ By / Uncategorized

In April last year we had carried our first post on the Bayer-Cipla litigation. This particular lawsuit was unique because Justice Bhat had fast-tracked the case with some unique innovations. While we have covered the progress in the litigation we have not really covered the arguments being put forth by both the parties to this litigation. In this post, Ms. Taapsi Johri, an experience patent lawyer, who has represented several originator pharmaceutical companies, has written us this in-depth analysis of

Guest Post: Taking a closer look at the Nexavar litigation Read More »

Justice Sridevan’s report exposes the Central Govt’s apathy towards the IPAB

/ By / Uncategorized

C.H. Unnikrishnan of the Mint carried an interesting story, yesterday, on the state of affairs at the IPAB. As most of you may know Shamnad had filed a PIL before the Madras High Court in January of this year against the creation of the IPAB on the grounds that it is unconstitutional for violating the doctrine of separation of powers. A secondary aim of the PIL was to bring urgent attention towards the absolute lack of resources at the IPAB.

Justice Sridevan’s report exposes the Central Govt’s apathy towards the IPAB Read More »

Conducting a post-mortem on Astella’s Indian Patent No: 234753

/ By / Uncategorized

Continuing from my last post on Astella’s patent infringement lawsuit against Micro-Labs, I’ve managed to access the details of the file wrapper from the IPAIRs system and I thought it would be interesting to point out a few of the other issues that may arise in the challenge Astella’s Indian Patent No: 234753. Let me also insert the caveat that the accuracy of this post is directly dependant on the accuracy of the information uploaded on the IPAIRs system and

Conducting a post-mortem on Astella’s Indian Patent No: 234753 Read More »

Japanese pharmaceutical company sues for patent infringement in Delhi to protect its French markets

/ By / Uncategorized

We have recently received information about an interesting patent infringement case filed by Astellas Pharma Europe B.V. (‘Astellas’) a company incorporated in the Netherlands, before the Delhi High Court (C.S. (O.S.) No. 1166 of 2011) against Micro-Labs Ltd., a Bangalore based Indian pharmaceutical company. Despite the distinctly European name of the Plaintiff, it is in reality a subsidiary of a Japanese company, which in itself is the child of a merger between two Japanese companies. For some reason, probably one

Japanese pharmaceutical company sues for patent infringement in Delhi to protect its French markets Read More »

Guest Post: Delhi HC issues yet another John Doe order to protect Speedy Singhs

/ By / Uncategorized

Tania Sarcar our now regular guest blogger has sent us another post on a ‘John Doe’ order passed by the Delhi High Court to protect the Bollywood movie Speedy Singhs. Delhi HC issues yet another John Doe order to protect Speedy Singhs By, Tania Sarcar Yet another John Doe order has been passed by the Delhi High Court, this time for the movie Speedy Singhs, starring Akshay Kumar. The producers of the movie moved the High Court for an injunction

Guest Post: Delhi HC issues yet another John Doe order to protect Speedy Singhs Read More »

Tracking the litigation around Bayer’s Nexavar patent in India

/ By / Uncategorized

For the last year or so, Bayer has been defending its Indian Patent No. 215758 for ‘sorafenib’, which is marketed under the brand name Nexavar and is targeted at patients suffering from liver and kidney cancers. (Image from here) As we had reported in April last year, Bayer had sued Cipla for patent infringement, while Cipla counter-sued for revocation of the patent on grounds of invalidity and suppression of vital Section 8 information. Earlier this year, Bayer sued NATCO before

Tracking the litigation around Bayer’s Nexavar patent in India Read More »

IPAB on a roll – Creates a new logo and slogan!

/ By / Uncategorized

I’m glad to report that the IPAB appears to have been given a new lease of life by its new Chairperson Justice Prabha Sridevan (retd.). As we had reported earlier, Justice Sridevan is a retired judge of the Madras High Court and was a part of the bench which delivered the historic judgment dismissing Novartis’s constitutional challenge against Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970. The IPAB has been announcing a number of changes to its procedures and rules, in

IPAB on a roll – Creates a new logo and slogan! Read More »

Scroll to Top