01 January 0001

IPR Amicus: January 2016


The curious case of patent infringement CTR v. Sergi

A plaintiff would be entitled to rely on the grant of a patent as prima facie proof of validity, but the defendant would only be required to demonstrate (through scientific literature, expert evidence, etc.) the vulnerability of the patent, rather than its invalidity, to defeat an application for interim injunction. However, the fact that the plaintiff holds a valid patent would not automatically entail the grant of an injunction, just as a defendant’s claim that the validity of the patent would be challenged would not automatically entail the denial of an injunction. In both cases, the party must adduce evidence that demonstrates the prima facie validity or vulnerability of the patent, as the case may be…


Ratio decidendi

  • When a joke was so obvious that there can be no mistake as to source or affiliation — United State District Court of South New York rules in favour of alleged ‘diluter’ of the trademark
  • Unauthorised use of trademark and selling counterfeit goods — Delhi High Court awards punitive damages
  • Likelihood of confusion in trademarks — Trade channels and not physical or chemical attributes, important - Calcutta High Court
  • Trademarks – Composite marks to be compared as a whole — Delhi High Court


Patent Office decision

  • Method of treatment claims filed in the international phase amended as composition claims in national phase — Amendment not allowable


News Nuggets

  • Controller refuses CL application in respect of Saxagliptin
  • SIPP or Start-Ups Intellectual Property Protection scheme


January, 2016/Issue-54 January, 2016/Issue-54

Browse articles