Author name: Rajiv Kr. Choudhry

Rajiv did his engineering from Nagpur University in 2000 in electronics design technology. He has completed his LL.B. from Delhi University, Law Center II in 2006, while working as an engineer at ST Microelectronics in NOIDA. After his LL.B., he went on to The George Washington Univeristy, Washington DC to do his LL.M. in 2007. After his LL.M., he has worked in the US at a prestigious IP law firm based out of Philadelphia. Till 2014, he was Of-Counsel to a Noida based IP law firm where he specialized in advising clients on wireless, telecommunication, and high technology. Rajiv is the founder of Tech Law Associates, a New Delhi based law firm specializing in IP law, with a focus on high - technology, and patent law. His core IP interest areas are the intersection of technology and IP, Indian IP policy, innovation, and telecommunications patents. He is also an inventor with pending applications in machine-to-machine communications domain (WO2015029061).

NATCO files compulsory license against Bayer’s Nexavar

/ By / Patent

NATCO recently filed an application with the Indian patent office for Nexavar, Bayer’s blockbuster drug for treating liver and kidney cancer on the grounds of exorbitant pricing and non-availability/limited availability.  The application was published on August 12, 2011.  The Indian patent rules provide a period of two months from the day of publication within which documented support or objections may be sent to the patent office.   In it’s application, NATCO claims that the drug Nexavar costs (approximately) 50 USD per tablet […]

NATCO files compulsory license against Bayer’s Nexavar Read More »

Practice Pointer Series: Commercial Evaluation, An Integral Part of Out-Licensing

/ By / Uncategorized

Tarun Khurana, one of our frequent guest bloggers, has sent us a practice pointer related to commercial evaluation.  This post would be useful for patentees, applicants and attorneys as Tarun provides an excellent overview of diligence both prior to and post patenting by providing specific cases.  (Warning: Long post follows). Working in Technology Transfer and IP Out-Licensing domain makes one assess and evaluate commercial viability of numerous IP backed innovations across technology domains.  This evaluation helps appreciate that apart from

Practice Pointer Series: Commercial Evaluation, An Integral Part of Out-Licensing Read More »

TenXC patent litigation-arguments concluded

/ By / Patent

Arguments were concluded in the TenXC patent litigation last Friday.  We now eagerly await the decision.  As discussed in our previous posts, here and here, the arguments from both sides went predictably-the plaintiff arguing patent was valid and infringed and defendants that the patent was invalid.  Of course, this is the general case in patent litigation. The defendants argued that all they had to show was a credible challenge to the patent, and because there was no presumption of validity of

TenXC patent litigation-arguments concluded Read More »

Google buys Motorola Mobility for $12.5Billion

/ By / Uncategorized

Google today announced that it will purchase Motorola Mobility for $12.5Billion.  This decision comes on the heels of the Nortel patent auction where Google had missed out on the erstwhile Canadian telecom giant’s assets.  With the purchase of Motorola Mobility, Google now owns about 17000 patents in the wireless domain.  This number is almost three times the patents in the Nortel patent auction.  Motorola Mobility was formed earlier this year when Motorola hived off its operating units into separate entities-Motorola

Google buys Motorola Mobility for $12.5Billion Read More »

Does size matter: the case of an anti-narcoleptic drug, modafinil?

/ By / Patent

Long post follows:  About a month ago, the UK Chancery division patents courts (England and Wales) rendered an opinion (Justice Floyd) regarding claim construction in defining size of particles of an anti-narcoleptic drug, modafinil, in pharmaceutical compositions.  The patent court construed patent claims to determine whether there is an infringement, if any.  Facts:  The dispute involves three patents related to the drug modafinil, used to treat sleep disorders such as narcolepsy.  Orchid Europe is the manufacturer of generic modafinil and

Does size matter: the case of an anti-narcoleptic drug, modafinil? Read More »

Application of Orphan Drug Act to section 3(d)?

/ By / Patent

Shamnad had some time back discussed with me the idea of application of the Orphan Drug Act (ODA) to section 3(d) the Indian patent act. Specifically Shamnad had suggested using the ODA test (clinical superiority test based on patient care rather than one on structural similarity) and applying it to section 3(d).What follows is a brief primer on the ODA and applicability to the Indian act as suggested by Shamnad. Hence under our patent act, section 3(d) may also be

Application of Orphan Drug Act to section 3(d)? Read More »

Consortium of six acquire Nortel’s patent portfolio

/ By / Patent

Google today missed out on acquiring bankrupt Nortel’s patent portfolio that was up for grabs.  Microsoft, Apple, RIM, EMC Corp., Ericsson and Sony edged out Google and bid $4.5BILLION to win the assets.  Yes, that is a billion with with a B.  In exchange for $4.5B, the consortium gets 6000 patents and patent applications covering mobile communications, 4G and 3G networks, data and voice networks, and others in optics and semiconductors.Google had started with an opening bid of $900 million

Consortium of six acquire Nortel’s patent portfolio Read More »

Novartis v. Cipla: Cipla wins pre grant opposition (593/CHENP/2005)

/ By / Patent

Our patent office recently issued a decision in Cipla’s (Opponent) favor in a pre-grant opposition proceeding against Novartis (Applicant).  The opposition proceedings were brought under sections (25(1)(e),  (25(1)(f), and  (25(1)(h) of the Patents Act.  The Controller (Dr. Subramaniyan, Chennai office) decided the issue of novelty in favor of the Applicant, and  decided the issues of inventive step and non inventiveness (section 3) in favor of the opponent.  A brief introduction to the grounds is followed by our comments. Inventive step: The Controller

Novartis v. Cipla: Cipla wins pre grant opposition (593/CHENP/2005) Read More »

Presumption of validity of a (an Indian) patent

/ By / Patent

Prashant had some time back written about the Indian patent and trademark adjudication process. While reading this post, I revisited the section on patent and TM validity as provided in our patent/TM act and rules. Unsurprisingly, the Indian patent law does not provide for a presumption of validity of a patent, whereas under the TM act, registration of a mark is prima facie evidence of its validity. Recently, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft v. i4i  case

Presumption of validity of a (an Indian) patent Read More »

Patent litigation and standards of injunctions

/ By / Uncategorized

Patent law litigation is comparatively new in the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India.  When hearing patent law disputes, Judges mostly follow the usual steps for grant or denial of an injunction.  This approach of applying the usual standards for grant/denial of an injunction in patent law cases is fraught with danger.  It is dangerous because patent litigation even though a part of regular litigation, is different from other Order (O) XXXIX litigation relating to injunctions.  This post

Patent litigation and standards of injunctions Read More »

Scroll to Top