Astrazenceca U.K. Limited Vs. Natco Pharma Limited and Others

Decided On : Nov-26-2012

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

LAW: the Patents Act, section 2(1)(j, section 15, the Patents Act, Article 226, Section 15, the Patents Act, Section 117 A, the Woodburn Declaration II, the Woodburn Declaration, the Woodburn Declaration, Order 47 Rule 1

PERSON: Bench Sitting, PRABHA SRIDEVAN, Formula I., Controller, EP226, Controller, Controller, Controller, Controller, Controller, S.15, Structurally, Woodburn, KB, Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hegde, Mallikarjun Bhavanappa Tirumale, Controller

CARDINAL: 263, 2007”., 2, 1, 2, 3., 4., 7, 318, 5, eight, 3(d, 6, 89/2008, 8, 226, 9, 10, 11, 332, 11 to 25, 12, 13, 34(5, 34(5, 34(5, 4-fold, 16-fold, 100, 50, 12.5, 34(5, greater than 200, more than 16-fold, 16-fold, 26, 34(5, 28, 34(5, 100, 12.5, 34(5, 26, zero, 34(5, 200, 12.5, less than 12.5, 1, 5, 14, 15, two, 16, 17., 18, 19

DATE: 2012, 31st May, 2011, 31st August, 31st May, 2011, 30th August, 2007, 19th April, 1996, 6th February, 2006, 13th June, 2006, 18th July, 2006, 21st November, 2006, 26th March, 2007, 30th August, 2007, 19th November, 2007, November, 2009, 31st May, 2011, 18th August, 2006, three months, three months, 21/09/2012, 2001, fourteen months, four months, 2 to 4 weeks, 1970, 51, 1999, 2010, 1970, “On 22nd March, 2007, 28, 20thJune 2008, 22nd, 20thJune,2008, 1stJuly,2008, 22nd March 2007, 20th June 2008, 1st July, 2008, a period of, two weeks, today, 22nd March, 2007, 2007, Para 18, 5th January, 1995, January 1997, January, 1995, 41, 64, 41, 64, January, 1997, daily, daily

ORG: the IP Office, State of Bihar, the Review Petition, the Review Petition, The Learned Counsel, the Learned Counsel, Hon'ble High Court, Cipla Limited, the Review Petition, the Review Petition, Controller, the Learned Counsel, Controller, The Learned Counsel, Board, the Trade Marks Act, S., the Learned Counsel, M/s. UCD FARCHIM SA, M/s. CIPLA LTD, ORS, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, Eli Lilly, Eli Lilly and Co., Eli Lilly and Co., Eli Lilly, 4thJuly,2008 Eli Lilly and Co., Eli Lilly and Co., IPAB, Eli Lilly and Co., IPAB, RLL, IPAB, Eli Lilly and Co.'s, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, Intellectual Property Appellate Board, IPAB, Eli Lilly and Co., Controller, Controller, Applicant, Controller, Controller, Controller, A-431, Controller, Controller, Controller, Controller, Applicant, Controller, Controller, A-431, Controller, Controller, A-431, A-431, A-431, Applicant, Controller, xenograft, A-431, Controller, A-431, Controller, Applicant, Controller, Opponent, A-431, Controller, Applicant, Opponent, Controller, AIR 1960, SC 137, Ors, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Court, the Learned Counsel, Controller, Controller, IPAB, Controller, CPC, CPC, Board

ORDINAL: 1st, 2nd, first

GPE: Anil Rai, Delhi, F. Hoffmann-La, CS(OS, C.C., Delhi, New Delhi, 1st July,2008

NORP: S.91, Designs

FAC: 08/02/2010

PRODUCT: Example 1, the Example 3

QUANTITY: 200 mg/kg, 200 mg/kg

PERCENT: 92 to 100%, 96%, 77 to 91%, 56 to 66%, 30%, 21%, 69%, 30%, between 56 and 66%

EVENT: Table II, the Declaration II

TIME: several hours