Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan AttorneysAn ISO 9001 / 27001 certified law firm

IPR Articles

Search From Date To Date
Controller overreach or common sense? - A tale of Section 83 of the Patents Act

By Dr.Amitavo Mitra

In IPR Amicus Issue No. 49, dated August 2015, the interplay between the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (BDA), and intellectual property rights in India, specifically, the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) was broadly explored, with particular reference to biological inventions.

In this article, we further attempt to explore and ...

Light at the end of the tunnel for Computer-Related Inventions?

By Mukundan Chakrapani

In the May edition of IPR Amicus, we commented on the continued ambiguity in the examination of computer-related inventions (CRIs) by the Indian Patent Office [see end note 1]. Here, we review three recent Controller’s Decisions to highlight that probably, consistency is emerging in the examination of CRIs. We hope th...

A Practical Approach to Fulfilling Section 8 Requirements

By Mukundan Chakrapani

Section 8 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 mandates applicant(s) filing an application for a patent in India to furnish information pertaining to applications for a patent for ‘the same or substantially the same invention’ filed in any country ou...

Ambiguous standard for examination of CRIs

By Ankur Garg & Anurit Banerjee

The Indian Patent Office had issued the modified guidelines for examination of Computer Related Invention (CRI) [see end note 1] on 19 Feb 2016. The CRI guidelines propose a framework for assessing patent eligibility of such claims under section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970.

Specifically, the CRI guidel...

Product by process claims - A perspective

By Sribindhu Chivukala & Archana V


Section 2(j) of the Patents Act, 1970 (the Act) defines an invention as a new product or a process involving an inventive step and capable of industrial application. The legal protection to an invention is based on the claims of the granted patent. Typically, a p...

Stay of proceedings in an infringement suit and challenging validity of a registered trademark

By Nupur Kumar

A Full bench (Three Judges) of the Delhi High Court recently held that prior permission of the Court is not necessary under Section 124(1)(b)(ii) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (TMA) for filing a rectification petition before the IPAB during the pendency of an infringement suit.
A reference was made to the Full bench of ...

Obviousness - Different standards for Opposition and Revocation?

By Sudarshan Singh Shekawat

Patents are not just instruments of private commercial utilisation but also have an impact on public policy. They are thus, governed by a system which allows for challenge to the validity of a patent at different stages.

Before the Patent Office, the Act provides for ‘pre-grant opposition’ under S. 2...

The curious case of patent infringement CTR v. Sergi

By Vindhya Srinivasamani

This case pertains to a suit filed by CTR Manufacturing Industries Limited against Sergi Transformer Explosion Prevention Technologies Pvt. Ltd. for infringement of its patent IN202302 (suit patent) for “A system and method for preventing and/or detecting explosion and/or fire of electrical transformers”, with an appl...

Divided on divisional patents

By Rohini Dutta


Divisional patent applications refer to such patent applications which have been divided out from a first filed patent application, also called a parent application. Section 16 of the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) lays down the principle for filing of a divisional application. Divisional pat...

Slogans - An issue of descriptiveness

By Dr Sheetal Vohra, Nupur Kumar, Tulika Pandey

Getting trademark protection for slogans is often accompanied by one particular hurdle of retaining exclusivity, which results from their descriptive nature. A slogan is generally a combination of common words which describes the goods or services, or glorifies the goods and/or services of the company. Due ...

Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction in case of Sitagliptin

By Sanuj Das

Nearly three years after Merck (patentee) initiated an infringement action over its patented diabetics drug sitagliptin (Indian Patent 209816, sold under the brand names Januvia and Janumet), the Delhi High Court recently permanently restrained the defendant from the business of Sitagliptin.


Software inventions - Examining patentability

By Dr. Mukundan Chakrapani

The Indian Patent Office recently released the final version of the Guidelines for Examination of Computer Related Inventions. They offer much needed clarity on the vexing issue of determining subject matter eligibility of Computer Related Inventions (“CRI”), a.k.a. software inventions. A standout feature of the fin...

Page(s) 1 2 3 4 5 6 
Please refer 'Archives' section to see older items.
Search People
Search People
Alphabetical by First Name
Enter at least a name or a keyword to search