CiteTEXT
...of both parties, I accept the fact that the instant invention is not patentable under section 3(f) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 as amended.”6. The Controller has just stated the...appellant had amended its claims.3. On 26/05/2009 a notice of hearing under section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as Act) was issued...section 25(1) by way of representation.2. The Indian Patent Application No. 3900.DELNP/2007 filed on 24/05/2007 by Colgate-Palmolive Company (USA) is directed to an “oral care implement...
...relating to lack of novelty was also rejected. The second respondent had contended that the invention was excluded from patentability under Section 3(f) of the Patents Act, 1970 (the Patents ...
1/10
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) filed under Section 117-A of the Patents Act, 1970 prays that this Court may...to the Appellant was revoked under Section 25(4) of the Patents Act, 1970;
(ii) To hold and declare that the subject matte rof Patent No.452008 constitutes a valid invention under...
...section 77(1)(f) of the Patents Act, 1970.3. We heard Shri S.P Chokalingam. Shri S.P Chokalingam submitted that the order was passed on 07-07-2010 in the main matt...Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970, against an order passed under section 77(1)(f) of the ...with section 77(1)(f) of the Patents Act, 1970.2. The matter was placed before the Board for deciding the issue of maintainability. The Board had appointed...
...section 77(1)(f) of the Patents Act, 1970.3. We heard Shri S.P Chokalingam. Shri S.P Chokalingam submitted that the order was passed on 07-07-2010 in the main matt...Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970, against an order passed under section 77(1)(f) of the ...with section 77(1)(f) of the Patents Act, 1970.2. The matter was placed before the Board for deciding the issue of maintainability. The Board had appointed...
....11. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the ingredients of Section 3(f) of the Patents Act, 1970 clearly enjoins that 'the mere arrangement ..., Section 3(f) of the Patents Act, 1970 defines 'What are not inventions' which reads as under:“3(f) the mere arrangement or re-arrangement or dupl...filed an Application under Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970 in O.R.A.No.... of 2007 for revocation of Patent...
...;C. Whether the word “known” for the purpose of Section 3(d) is different from known for the purpose of prior art;D. Construction of the..., efficacy does not include all the inherent and known properties of all the derivatives mentioned in the explanation of Section 3(d) and for pharmaceutical substances efficacy should mean therapeutic efficacy....within the meaning of the Patents Act, 1970;(b) β form does not satisfy the test of Section 3(d);(c) Scope and constru...
...section 77(1)(f) of the Patents Act, 1970. 3. We heard Shri S.P. Chokalingam. Shri S.P. Chokalingam submitted that the order was passed on 07-07-2010 in the mai...Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970, against an order passed under section 77(1)(f) of the ...section 15 read with section 77(1)(f) of the Patents Act, 1970. 2 2. The matter was placed before the Board for deciding the issue of maintainability. The Board...
...on the submissions of the patent applicant and that no independent reasoning is discernible.
6. As regards the conclusions with regard to Section 3(d) and 3(f) of the ...(the Patents Act), learned counsel submits that the objection under Section 3(d) that the impugned invention involved mere use of a known process, machine or apparatus should not...
under Section 2(1)(t) of the Patents Act, the Court would ordinarily decline to exercise jurisdiction in view of the petitioner having an efficacious alternative st...
...clauses (d) and (f) of Section 3 of Patents Act, 1970. On the other hand, the plaintiff replied that their product is not ...Section 104 of Patents Act, 1970, after the counter-claim alongwith revocation was filed by the defendants in the suit.
2....sub-section (1) of Section 9 of Patents Act, 1970. It is only after the patent was registered that the defendants filed their oppos...
...that the patent is liable to be revoked as patent ineligible as per clauses (d) and (f) of section 3 of the Patents Act. In order to substantiate this contention, he submitted that the invention uses the k...the art. In light of the above conclusion, it becomes unnecessary to examine whether the invention is patent ineligible under Sections 3(d) and 3(f) of the Patents Act read with Section 64(1)(k...alia on the grounds that the invention lacks novelty, inventive step and is patent ineligible under Sections 3(d) and (f) of the Patents Act, 1970 (the Patents Act...
...validity of the suit patent is in severe doubt. The Defendants" further case is that the suit patent is not a patentable invention, in view of Section 3, sub-sections (a) (c) (d) and (f), of the Patents ...different. Various grounds have also been relied upon to argue that under Section 64, the patent lacks novelty and inventive step. The Defendants also aver that the patent is hit by Section 3, sub-sections (a), (c), (d) &am...invention of a new product. The objection under Section 3(d) is applicable when there is a `mere discovery" of a new property or new use. This provision does not apply in cases where on the basis of existing technology, newer techno...
...with Section 3(d) and Section 64(1)(a), 64(1)(d), 64(1)(f) and 64(1)(k) of the Patents Act, the suit patents are vulnerable to challenge and hence the injunction applications were dismiss...expired, the product IN „907 gives rise to anticipation under Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 64(1)(a) of the Patents Act by prior claiming. The suit patent IN „907 is also hit by Section 3(d) ...enhancement of therapeutic efficacy to overcome the rigours of Section 3(d) of the Patents Act. The pharmaceutical data of IN „229 and IN „907 are identical and thus it does not amount to any new invention...
...that
(i) IN'893 lacks novelty and is liable to be revoked under Section 64(e) of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the "Patents Act");
...novelty; (ii) lack of inventive step; (iii) non-patentable subject matter under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act; and (iv) non-patentable subject matter under Section 3(f) of the ...protection in view of Section 3(d) of the Patents Act; and
(iv) are not eligible for protection in view of Section 3(f) of the Patents ...
...Suit Patent could be challenged under Section 3(f) of the Patents Act as it was not a rearrangement but a change in the manner in which asymmetry was introduced in an antenna leading to greater...frivolous or vague. The Court noted that submissions were not advanced in support of the ground that the Suit Patent was invalid under Section 3(a) of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereafter ‘the Patents ...the Patents Act. The Court noted that the objection under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act would be available against attempt to patent a mere discovery, or a new property or a new use. The said...
...with Section 3(d) and Section 64(1)(a), 64(1)(d), 64(1)(f) and 64(1)(k) of the Patents Act, the suit patents are vulnerable to challenge and hence the injunction applications were dismiss...expired, the product IN „907 gives rise to anticipation under Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 64(1)(a) of the Patents Act by prior claiming. The suit patent IN „907 is also hit by Section 3(d) ...enhancement of therapeutic efficacy to overcome the rigours of Section 3(d) of the Patents Act. The pharmaceutical data of IN „229 and IN „907 are identical and thus it does not amount to any new invention...
...Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, 1970 ("Patents Act") and that it is excluded from patent protection under Section 3(f). A further objection on the ground of lack of sufficie.... ... Respondent
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) filed under Section 117-A of the Patents Act, 1970, praying to set aside the impugned order dated 27.06.2024 passed by the...issued more than 18 months later on 27.06.2024 rejecting the subject application on the sole ground of lack of inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act citing prior arts, D1, US 6, 371...
...is not patentable under section 3(f) of the Patents Act, 1970.59. The learned counsel for the applicant relied on the (1) Bishwanath Prasad Radhey Shyam v. Hindustan Metal Industries...i.e, cap and muffler working independently and such combination are not patentable under section 3(f). Therefore, it is difficult to accept that this is an invention which....17. Therefore, applying the above decisions and on fact, we find that the alleged invention lacks novelty and it is not patentable under section 3(f). it is...
...raised by the Petitioner under
21 Section 3(d) in the pre-grant opposition and the same are extracted hereunder for ready reference:-
...Section 25(1)(b) and non-patentability under Section 25(1)(f) read with Section 3(d) and 3(e) of the Act as well as objecting to the scope of the amended claims.
...- consideration of pre-grant opposition under Section 25(1)(f) read with Section 3(d) of the Act; (b) non-consideration of crucial and relevant documents placed on record by the Petitioner, including prior...
...;
(iii) obviousness and lack of inventive step;
(iv) non-patentability under Section 3(f) of the Patents Act, 1970; and
...-patentability:-
(a) The alleged invention may face challenges under Section 3(f) of the Patent Act due to reliance on known configurations and functionalities of cooking stoves...without adjudicating on the grounds in the said opposition and contrary to Section 13(4) of the Patents Act. The patent office has passed only a single page order dismissing the pre-grant opposition on...
...Section 25(1)6of the Patents Act, 1970. The objection under Section 25(1)(f) was further predicated on the premise that the subject invention that the appella...
under Section 25(1)(e) and under Section 25(1)(f) read with Section 3(d), of the Patents Act.
...) The office is in the same opinion with the opponent view on Sec. 25 (1) (f) i.e. "the subject matter of the impugned Application is not patentable under Section 3(d) of the Act". The applicant argues...