Author name: Rahul Bajaj

Rahul Bajaj is a fourth year law student at the University of Nagpur. His interest in intellectual property law began taking a concrete shape when he pursued Professor William Fisher's online course on copyright law in the second year of law school. Since then, Rahul has worked on a diverse array of IP matters during his internships. He is particularly interested in studying the role of intellectual property law in facilitating access to education.

Imposition of Costs in IP Disputes: US Supreme Court Provides Valuable Guidance

/ By / Copyright

One of the most significant American decisions in the sphere of copyright law in recent times was delivered by Justice Breyer in 2013 in the case of Kirtsaeng versus John Wiley and Sons. As Shamnad Sir noted on this blog, the American Supreme Court held that the first sale doctrine, which states that the purchaser of a copyrighted work is free to sell/distribute the work in any way he deems fit, applies internationally and has no geographical limitations. On this […]

Imposition of Costs in IP Disputes: US Supreme Court Provides Valuable Guidance Read More »

Constitutional Validity of US Patent Opposition Proceedings Assailed before the Supreme Court

/ By / Patent

One of the most vexed issues in the adjudication of patent disputes in India has consistently been the legal competence and professional training of the officers in the Patent Office who are tasked with the responsibility of such adjudication. As Prashant has noted on this blog before, the entrustment of intrinsic judicial functions to the Patent Office, relating to the adjudication of opposition proceedings and compulsory licensing applications, may violate the doctrine of separation of powers by providing a legal

Constitutional Validity of US Patent Opposition Proceedings Assailed before the Supreme Court Read More »

Ultratech Cement versus Dalmia Cement: Bombay High Court on Protection of Components of Registered Marks

/ By / Trademark

In a fairly straightforward case of trademark infringement and passing off, Justice S.C. Gupte of the Bombay High Court dismissed the plaintiff’s application for interim relief on the ground that there was no concrete likelihood of deception or confusion. While the case is otherwise quite unexceptional, the judgment makes for interesting reading because of the court’s lucid enunciation of the difference between a descriptive mark and a prominent/essential mark and the discussion on the rights of owners of registered trademarks

Ultratech Cement versus Dalmia Cement: Bombay High Court on Protection of Components of Registered Marks Read More »

Government Withdraws Guidelines Fixing FRAND Terms on the Licensing of Bt Cotton

/ By / Innovation, Patent, Plant Variety Protection

As our readers would recall, the Ministry of Agriculture had issued a set of guidelines with far-reaching implications on May 18th, requiring patentees such as Monsanto to provide access to their GM technology to seed companies on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) basis. Prashant had analyzed the guidelines here. In case you were thinking that the face-off between the government/ Indian seed companies on the one hand and Monsanto on the other could not get any messier, you are

Government Withdraws Guidelines Fixing FRAND Terms on the Licensing of Bt Cotton Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 22-29)

/ By / Others

SpicyIP Highlight of the Week Our highlight of the week undoubtedly has to be Prof. Basheer’s two-part analysis of the decision of Deputy Controller, Rajesh Dixit, overruling all the objections to the grant of a patent to Gilead for Sovaldi. In the first post, Prof. Basheer notes how the Deputy Controller erroneously conflated the ‘novelty’ and ‘inventive step’ enquiries while assessing Gilead’s application and came to the conclusion that the production of Sovaldi involved an inventive step by applying the

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 22-29) Read More »

Roche Moves Delhi HC to Challenge the Approval Granted by DCGI to Yet Another Biosimilar

/ By / Drug Regulation, Innovation, Patent

A couple of weeks ago, I had analyzed the Delhi High Court’s judgment here and here, delivered by Justice Manmohan Singh, imposing some conditions on the sale of Roche’s breast cancer drug, Trastuzumab (Herceptin), by Biocon and Mylan. While Justice Singh allowed Biocon and Mylan to sell the biosimilar of Trastuzumab subject to some conditions, the decision was appealed to a Division Bench which has allowed the two companies to continue marketing the drug till 21st July. On the heels

Roche Moves Delhi HC to Challenge the Approval Granted by DCGI to Yet Another Biosimilar Read More »

Grant of Patent to Gilead for Sovaldi Challenged in Delhi High Court

/ By / Drug Regulation, Innovation, Patent

As our readers would recall, we had analyzed the Indian Patent Office’s decision to dismiss the multiple pre-grant opposition claims and consequently approve Gilead’s application for the grant of a patent for its hugely important Hepatitis C drug, Sovaldi, last week. The 58-page decision, which was issued by the Deputy Controller Rajesh Dixit, virtually amounted to a complete U-turn by the Patent Office which had rejected Gilead’s application for Sovaldi last January. The decision came in for sharp criticism, not

Grant of Patent to Gilead for Sovaldi Challenged in Delhi High Court Read More »

Delhi HC Imposes Strict Conditions on the Sale of Biomedicines: Part 2/2

/ By / Data Exclusivity, Drug Regulation, Patent

In part 1 of my analysis, I offered a brief summary of the Delhi High Court’s judgment imposing strict conditions on the sale of the biosimilar version of Roche’s breast cancer drug, Trastuzumab, by Biocon and Mylan. Before I delve into the findings of the single judge, I should point out that, as one of the commenters to my previous article noted, the decision has been stayed by a Division Bench and the matter is listed to be next heard

Delhi HC Imposes Strict Conditions on the Sale of Biomedicines: Part 2/2 Read More »

Delhi HC Imposes Strict Conditions on the Sale of Biomedicines: Part 1/2

/ By / Data Exclusivity, Drug Regulation, Patent

In an order that is likely to have wide-ranging ramifications on the biomedicine industry, the Delhi High Court on Monday (25th April) imposed some conditions on the sale of the biosimilar version of Roche’s breast cancer drug, Trastuzumab, by Biocon and Mylan. The decision, clocking in at 227 pages, discusses a number of profoundly important issues such as data exclusivity, patent linkage, norms to be followed for patient safety and the rights of patentees after the expiry of their patent.

Delhi HC Imposes Strict Conditions on the Sale of Biomedicines: Part 1/2 Read More »

Securing the Independence of the Copyright Board on Firmer Legal Moorings: Madras HC Takes a Step in the Right Direction

/ By / Copyright

In a development that has sent constitutional law and IP nerds like yours truly into a tizzy, the Madras High Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Copyright Board (“the Board”) while striking down the composition of the committee responsible for selecting the members of the Board. As our readers would recall, we shared the details of the PIL filed by the South Indian Music Companies Association to challenge the constitutionality of the composition and method of functioning of the Board

Securing the Independence of the Copyright Board on Firmer Legal Moorings: Madras HC Takes a Step in the Right Direction Read More »

Scroll to Top