Category Archives: Patent

Patent

Bombay HC Addresses Ambiguity in the Patent Agent Examination


The Bombay HC recently delivered an order dealing with certain objections raised against the Patent Agent Examination, 2016. In their decision, they interpreted the Supreme Court’s decision in Kanpur University v. Samir Gupta (“Kanpur University”). This post examines the questions which arise due to the Court’s interpretation and application of this decision. The Question in Issue The Petitioner (a candidate who appeared for the said Examination) raised contentions regarding the answer options of a multiple choice question in the Examination…


Read More »
Drug Regulation Patent

IPO Grants Patent to Brodalumab


Last week, our IPO granted a patent to Amgen covering the drug Broadlumab.  Brodalumab is a human monoclonal antibody designed for the treatment of inflammatory diseases including psoriasis  In the United States, Broadlumab is known as Siliq and in Europe it is Kyntheum. The application for Broadalumab was filed as a PCT application – PCT/US2007/021174 (click here to see the page on WIPO – Patentscope) and was accorded application number: 2350/CHENP/2007. One can see the entire file on this link – https://www.quickcompany.in/patents/il-17-receiptor-a-antigen-binding-proteins Sandeep Rathod –…


Read More »
Copyright Overlaps in IP Patent Trademark

Obscenity and Morality under IP Law


  Obscenity under  the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) is a relic of India’s colonial past. Though the need for such a provision is often subject to debate, it is indisputable that the judiciary’s interpretation of this provision has been often been anachronistic in past instances. The judiciary has, no doubt, evolved from the infamous Hicklin Test (tendency of the impugned material to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences) to the contemporary community standards (testing the impugned material against contemporary…


Read More »
Patent

Deconstructing the FRAND Regime vis-à-vis Recourse to Injunctive Relief


We’re pleased to bring to you a guest post by Subhajeet Roy. Subhajeet is a recent graduate of Tamil Nadu National Law School, Tiruchirappalli. Deconstructing the FRAND Regime vis-à-vis Recourse to Injunctive Relief Subhajeet Roy Background Before one gets into the question of availability of injunctive relief in disputes related to Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), a quick recap of some important terms would be helpful. SEPs are those patents that must be used in order to comply with a said…


Read More »
Drug Regulation Patent

Standing Against XTANDI: An E-mail Campaign to Ensure Accessibility to Cancer Wonder-Drug


In their latest efforts to stop the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) from pursuing a patent for Xtandi, the Universities Allied for Essential Medicines (UAEM) is sending an e-mail petition to Janet Napolitano, the President of University of California. This attempt comes after UAEM made a representation before the Regents of the University of California for a third time, demanding that Xtandi be made more accessible in India. Xtandi has an eventful if not long history of controversies in…


Read More »
Patent

Did the Hindu’s Reporter Publish Fake News about Dr. Soumya Swaminathan Recommending a Compulsory License for Bedaquiline?


In July I had written about how I had filed applications under the Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking information from the government regarding assertions made in a news report by Vidya Krishnan of the Hindu in March of this year. A copy of the Hindu’s report was appended to my RTI application. In her report, Krishnan had mentioned that the government had requested Janssen and Otsuka for voluntary licenses for their new TB drugs, bedaquiline and delaminid and that…


Read More »
Patent

The Morality of Sexual Pleasure: Patent Office Training?


(This post has been co-authored with Prof. Shamnad Basheer) Yesterday, we highlighted a problematic Patent Office decision, rejecting a claim to a sexual stimulation device (a unique vibrator) on the grounds of immorality under Section 3(b) of the Patents Act. More specifically, the Controller held: 1. That an apparently innocuous looking sex aid device to further intimacy between couples is “obscene” 2. That the said device is not “useful or productive” 3. That the law does not take kindly to…


Read More »
Patent

Sexual Pleasure is Immoral: So Says the Indian Patent Office!


Don’t believe me? Read this decision where a patent claiming a sexually stimulating device (a unique vibrator) was denied on the ground that it was an “immoral” invention under section 3(b) of the Patents Act. In this case, the applicant, Standard Innovation Corporation (a Canadian entity) claimed a creative vibrator, branded now as “We-Vibe”. Unlike other vibrators, this does not really look like a vibrator, but is a rather interesting U-shaped device: sort of like a pair of headphones! Better still,…


Read More »
Patent

SpicyIP Tidbit: Novartis Pursues Aggressive Patent Strategy with Respect to Drug Vildagliptin


According to Times of India, Novartis obtained favourable court orders restraining five Ahmedabad-based pharma companies from manufacturing its patented drug for diabetes, Vildagliptin. Further, citing validity of its patent till 09 December 2019, Novartis moved the commercial court in Vadodara to ensure that four other companies do not get into production of the drug. It is reported that Novartis approached the Court after obtaining the requisite information from the State Government.


Read More »
Patent

Philips SEP Judgement: India’s First Post-Trial SEP Judgement has Serious Flaws


Earlier, we covered Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta’s decision in Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. vs. Rajesh Bansal And Ors. where the Delhi High Court found certain local manufacturers of DVD players liable for infringing Philip’s patents, which it claimed were Standard Essential Patents. I pointed out that the judgement was flawed on several counts. Given the importance of the jurisprudence on SEPs, the Court’s judgement requires some deeper examination. ‘Essentiality’ and the (Absent) Claim Construction In determining infringement, the plaintiff adopted…


Read More »