Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court said that the Controller is correct in stating that both the cited prior art and the claimed invention provide for the transmission of sensor data to a subscribing application, but the difference lies in how such data is transmitted.

madras high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“The monopoly claim is not in respect of a business method but in respect of a claimed invention deploying hardware, software and firmware for purposes of data privacy and protection”

delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

It is essential for the Indian Patent Office to adopt a more comprehensive approach when assessing Computer Related Inventions (CRIs), considering technical effects and contributions provided by the invention rather than solely focusing on the implementation of algorithms and computer-executable instructions.