IPR News

21 June 2017

A Single Judge of the Delhi High Court has on 22-05-2017 vacated the earlier ex-parte interim injunction in a case involving trademark infringement where the mark “PINDROP” was used by the plaintiffs for recording studio business (class 41) and the mark “PINDROP MUSIC” was used by the defendants for an online applicati...

21 June 2017

The US Supreme Court has held that patentee’s decision to sell a product exhausts all of its patent rights in that item, regardless of any restrictions the patentee purports to impose. It was also held that an authorized sale outside the United States, just as one within the United States, exhausts all rights under the US Patent Act. Th...

15 May 2017

Observing that the marks FERANTA and INTAS’ FERINTAS are sufficiently distinguishable and does not satisfy Section 29(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court has refused to grant an interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs in a trademark infringement and passing off suit.

The Court in it...

18 May 2017

Taking note of the fact that plaintiff had acquired a distinctive reputation and goodwill of its own under the trade names “ASIAN HAUS” and “SUSHI HAUS” for its food delivery outlets, Delhi High Court has restrained the defendants by an interim injunction from using the name “HAUS” for latter’s food de...

22 May 2017

Delhi High Court has set aside the ‘deemed to be withdrawn’ status of a patent application and restored the Indian National Phase application. The issue involved incorrect mention of the number of the patent application in Form 18 as well as in its covering letter, and absence of communication from the department seeking correction...

25 May 2017

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on 12 April 2017 has set aside the decision of the Single Judge Bench wherein the latter had vacated the earlier ex-parte interim injunction granted in favour of the Plaintiffs in a designs infringement case.

The Single Judge Bench had vacated the interim order on the basis of un...

15th May 2017

The plaintiff, a manufacturer of plastic insulated products claimed infringement of the registered design of its water bottle ‘PURO’ with a two-tone colour scheme, flip top and unique surface pattern and that the ‘Kudoz’ bottles sold by the defendant would mislead the public into thinking they were products of the pla...

8th May 2017

The plaintiff was the proprietor of the registered label marks comprising the word “Darzi” and was using the same for providing tailoring services. The defendants on the other hand were using the mark “Darzi on call” also for tailoring services.  They argued that the name was generic and the plaintiffs could not c...

11th May 2017

The plaintiff claimed that its copyright in the format/elements of a reality show to identify children with acting talent was infringed by the defendant who had also produced a show aimed at identifying talented children.

The plaintiff produced a production bible which laid out the format of the show, its thematic concept, var...

21st March 2017

Summary :

Before the Full Bench of High Court of Bombay, in the case of Cipla Limited v. M/s Cipla Industries Pvt. Ltd., the question pertaining to the use of a registered trademark as a corporate name in case of dissimilar goods was brought by way of reference from the Single Judg...

21st March 2017

Summary:

By Judgment & order dated March 08, 2017, a Single Judge of the Delhi High Court interpreted the exemption to infringement under Section 107A of the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) to hold that said exemption permits exports from India of a patented invention solely for uses reasonably related ...

A two-judge bench of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in HPL (I) Ltd. v. QRG Enterprises [FAO (OS) (COMM) No. 12/2017], has recently issued a ruling limiting the types of orders from which an appeal is permitted for a Commercial Dispute governed by the recently enacted Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Court Act, 2015 (...