patent application Archives

Madras HC sets aside Controller’s order rejecting patent application of Microsoft Tech. claiming invention titled ‘Message Communication of Sensor and other Data’

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.

Case Briefs High Courts

Omission of disease’s name in amended claims expands scope of composition, exceeding specification set in original claim: Delhi HC refuses to grant patent

“It is not in doubt that the composition is at best a derivative and would be the same substance as the ‘known substance’, therefore, unless and until significant enhancement of therapeutic efficacy is shown, such a composition would not be liable to be granted patent protection.”

Case Briefs High Courts

Invention applicable in business but primarily related to technical process is not a business method; Madras HC remanded patent application for reconsideration

“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”

Case Briefs High Courts

Madras High Court distinguishes between date of assignment and date of declaration in patent applications

Madras High Court directed the Controller of Patents and Designs to decide the patent application on merits and in accordance with law.

Case Briefs High Courts

Madras HC remands patent application on ‘Aluminum Trihydrate Particles’ for reconsideration; finds Controller’s order unreasoned

While drawing the conclusion that the application does not fulfil the requirements of Section 16, the respondent has merely referred to the objections raised in the hearing notice.

Case Briefs International Courts

Euro Patent Office | Ex-post facto analysis with benefit of hindsight knowledge of invention not a correct approach to decide patent application

Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office: A Bench of B. Stolz, Chairman and M.R. Vega Laso and J. Geschwind, members allowed