Author name: SpicyIP

SpicyIP Tidbit: Mankind v. A2 Lifesciences: Resorting to Mediation to Resolve IP Disputes

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by SpicyIP intern Shravya Pandre. Shravya is a third year BA.LLB. Hons. student at The National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, Hyderabad. Her previous post can be accessed here.] While interim injunctions seem to be the go-to remedy in India against IP infringements, negotiation as a means to resolve IP disputes rarely gets the same traction. The recent Delhi High Court order in Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. A2 Lifesciences & Anr. (pdf) is an apt […]

SpicyIP Tidbit: Mankind v. A2 Lifesciences: Resorting to Mediation to Resolve IP Disputes Read More »

Formulation/Composition Claims and Section 3(d): Analyzing the Utidelone Pre-grant Opposition Order

/ By / Patent

In light of the recent UTIDELONE patent grant order by the Indian Patent Office, Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan analyses the tactic to present a pharmaceutical invention as a composition to overcome Section 3(d) scrutiny and how this could be bad in law. Bharathwaj is a 3rd year LLB Student at RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur, and loves books and IP. His previous posts can be accessed here. Formulation/Composition Claims and Section 3(d): Analyzing the Utidelone Pre-grant Opposition Order By Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan “Name of the game

Formulation/Composition Claims and Section 3(d): Analyzing the Utidelone Pre-grant Opposition Order Read More »

Call for Submissions: NALSAR’s Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) Vol. 15 [Submissions by March 31, 2025]

/ By / Opportunities

We are pleased to announce that  NALSAR’s Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) is inviting submissions for its 15th Volume. The last date for submission of entries is March 31, 2025.  For further details, please read their call and the guidelines below- Call for Papers: The Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (Vol.15) The Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) is the flagship intellectual property law journal of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. IJIPL is India’s first student-run journal that is wholly

Call for Submissions: NALSAR’s Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) Vol. 15 [Submissions by March 31, 2025] Read More »

Comments Invited to Revise the ABS Guidelines, 2014 (December 17)

/ By / Biological Diversity

The National Biodiversity Authority has invited comments to revise the Guidelines on Access to Biological Resources and Associated Knowledge and Benefits Sharing Regulations, 2014 better known as the ABS Guidelines, 2014. The notice has cited the recent amendments to the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (see here) and Biological Diversity Rules, 2004 (see here) as the reason to revise the 2014 guidelines but does not specify who the signatory officer is or when the notice was published online. The comments are

Comments Invited to Revise the ABS Guidelines, 2014 (December 17) Read More »

Role of Family Courts in Intellectual Property Disputes: Looking at the Calluna Dispute before the Kerala High Court

/ By / Trademark

[This post has been authored by SpicyIP intern Kaustubh Chakrabarti. Kaustubh is a second year BA.LLB. (Hons.) student at Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.] On 10th October 2024, an intriguing question regarding jurisdiction of a family court over a trademark infringement claim came up (pdf) in front of a division bench of the Kerala High Court comprising of Justices Devan Ramachandran and M.B. Snehalatha. The petitioner, Mr. C.K. Chandran was seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondent, his spouse,

Role of Family Courts in Intellectual Property Disputes: Looking at the Calluna Dispute before the Kerala High Court Read More »

Part II: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at the Division Application Filing Fiasco in the BASF SE Case

/ By / Patent

[The post is co-authored by Praharsh and Sabeeh.] In light of the controversy surrounding the rejection of BASF’s divisional application, in Part I, we looked at the order granting a patent to its parent application. A few hours after this grant order, BASF co-incidentally filed its divisional application which was rejected by the Patent Office, despite BASF’s request to condone the delay (pdf). Interestingly, the Patent Office still proceeded with examining BASF’s application despite the delay in filing the divisional

Part II: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at the Division Application Filing Fiasco in the BASF SE Case Read More »

Part I: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at the Division Application Filing Fiasco in the BASF SE Case

/ By / Patent

[This Post is co-authored by Swaraj, Praharsh, and Sabeeh] The November 28 order (pdf) of the Madras High Court is being extensively discussed among the patent attorneys circles of India as it deals with a unique situation concerning the timeframe to file a divisional application vis a vis grant of the parent application. The High Court was hearing an appeal by the EU chemical manufacturer BASF SE (Badische Anilin- und Sodafabrik) (appellant/ applicant) filed against a rejection order by the

Part I: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at the Division Application Filing Fiasco in the BASF SE Case Read More »

V Shrinivasan v. Music Academy: “Will”ing Posthumous Privacy/Publicity Rights into Existence

/ By / Others

Can someone’s wishes expressed in their Will overcome the precedents on descendability of publicity rights? Bharathwaj explores this question in light of the recent controversy surrounding the use of late singer M.S Subbulakshmi’s name as part of an award. Bharathwaj is a 3rd year LLB Student at RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur, and loves books and IP. His previous posts can be accessed here. V Shrinivasan v. Music Academy: “Will”ing Posthumous Privacy/Publicity Rights into Existence By Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan In a recent interim

V Shrinivasan v. Music Academy: “Will”ing Posthumous Privacy/Publicity Rights into Existence Read More »

Another day, Another Unreasoned Order by the Indian Patent Office: Analyzing Signal Pharmaceuticals vs Deputy Controller of Patents

/ By / Patent

In Signal Pharmaceuticals vs Deputy Controller of Patents, the Madras High Court set aside the impugned order by the Indian Patent Office for being a non-speaking one. Analysing the Court’s decision, Bharathwaj discusses when an order is regarded as non-speaking and assesses the probable reasons for such orders. Bharathwaj is a 3rd year LLB Student at RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur, and loves books and IP. His previous posts can be accessed here. Another day, Another Unreasoned Order by the Indian Patent Office:

Another day, Another Unreasoned Order by the Indian Patent Office: Analyzing Signal Pharmaceuticals vs Deputy Controller of Patents Read More »

[Sponsored] PatSeer Announces “PatAssist”, an AI Assistant Designed to Empower Each Step of Your Patent Research

/ By / Sponsored

We are pleased to bring to you this sponsored post by PatSeer on the launch of their new AI assistant. For more details, read on their announcement below: PatSeer Announces “PatAssist”, an AI Assistant Designed to Empower Each Step of Your Patent Research PatSeer, a global provider of AI-driven IP research and intelligence platform, is excited to announce the launch of its AI assistant “PatAssist”. Designed to answer deeper technical questions on your patent datasets with a high degree of

[Sponsored] PatSeer Announces “PatAssist”, an AI Assistant Designed to Empower Each Step of Your Patent Research Read More »

Scroll to Top