Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The real challenge with a patent application in respect of a synthesized non-living substance is establishing novelty, technical advance and not patent eligibility”
“The line of demarcation between diagnostic and non-diagnostic tests may not always be bright and could blur on occasion; even so, there is sufficient support both in the text and immediate context of the expression “diagnostic” in Section 3(i)”
Madras High Court viewed that there is nothing in the text or context of Section 3(d) which supports the interpretation that enhancement of known efficacy of the substance should be restricted to engineering or prospecting variants of phytase with inherently greater enzymatic activity over the reference phytase.
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.
The plea of novelty or originality must be examined vis-à-vis the date of registration of the suit design. The existence, thereafter, of any number of similar designs in the market, or even the publication of any number of similar designs, cannot indicate any want of novelty or originality in the suit design, within the meaning of Section 19(1)(c) or Section 4(a) of the Designs Act.