Advanced Search Results

Mariappan Vs. A.R. Safiullah,

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 23 and 53; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2, 12, 13(4), 43, 45(1), 48, 53, 104 and 108; Patents and Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 11 and 26(1); Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005; Copyright Act, 1967; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 151 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : 2008(5)CTC97; LC2008(3)431; (2008)6MLJ1117; 2008(38)PTC341(Mad)

for the appellant in O.S.A. No. 283 of 2006 the said decision requires reconsideration in view of the Patents (amendment) Act 2005 under which, major amendments were effected to the Patents Act, 1970. The learned Counsel further invited the attention … learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in O.S.A. No. 283 of 2006/applicant/plaintiff has submitted that as per Section 53 of the Patents Act, the term of the patent is for 20 years. As far as the patent

F. Hoffmann-la Roche Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cipla Limited

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Indian Patent Act, 1970 - Sections 2, 2(1) 3, 5, 5(2), 8, 10, 11A, 11A(3), 11A(7), 11B, 12, 13, 13(4), 14 to 21, 25(1), 25(2), 25(3), 25(4), 43, 45(1), 47, 48, 53, 59(1), 64, 64(1), 68, 104A, 107, 108 and 117A; Indian Companies Act, 1956; Trade and Cosmetics Act; Patent (Amendment) Act, 2005; Patent (Amendment) Act, 2002

Reported in : 148(2008)DLT598; LC2008(2)35; 2008(37)PTC71(Del)

learned Counsel also argued that the nature of changes brought in by amendment in 2005, affording multiple challenges shows that the previous rule, evolved by … patent in respect of Erlotinib and its process by application No. 537/Del/1996 on 13.3.1996. The Controller General of Patents, Trademarks and Designs, New Delhi granted a certificate bearing Patent No. 196774 dated 23.02.2007, which was recorded in … as it would seriously impinge on the period of patent itself.19. It was contended that by virtue of Section 53, the term of a patent is reckoned from the date of the application. The provision in Section 11A … process of its manufacture is patented according to provisions of the Patent Act, 1970 (hereafter 'the Act'). The Central Drug Standard Control Organisation, Directorate General

Bajaj Auto Ltd., State of Maharashtra Rep. by S. Ravikumar Vs. Tvs Mot ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2, 10, 11, 11(2), 11(3), 11B(1), 11B(3), 12, 12(1), 13, 13(1), 13(4), 25, 26(1), 43, 47, 48, 53(1), 64, 104A, 105, 106 and 108; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 - Sections 48; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005; Motor Vehicles Act; Patents Act, 1949; Patents and Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 12; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 2(8), 26(1), 51 and 53

Reported in : (2008)ILLJ726Mad; LC2008(1)217; 2008(36)PTC417(Mad)

'patent' means a patent for any invention granted under this Act.The said definition itself was substituted by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 (Act 15 of 2085) with effect from 01.01.2005. Prior to the said Amendment, Section 2(m) defined 'patent' as,'patent' … Patents Act, 1970, which is given effect from the date of filing of application for the patent under Section 53(1)(i), it is open to a party, who is opposing the patent to prove that there are no inventive

Sp.Chockalingam Vs. Controller of Patents

Court : Chennai

Subject : Education

that the amendment introduced to Section 126 of the Patents Act, 1970, by Section 67 (a) of the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 (Act 15 of 2005) as illegal, unconstitutional, ultra vires and void. For Petitioner : Mr.SP.Chockalingam, party-in-person For Respondents … impugned amendment introduced to Section 126 of the Patents Act as illegal, unconstitutional, ultra vires, void and unenforceable 53. In the result, this writ petition is allowed, declaring that the impugned amendment introduced to Section 126 of

Novartis AG Vs Venkata Narayana Active Ingredients Pvt Ltd

Court : Chennai

The Patents (Amendment) Ordinance, 2004, was replaced by the Patents (Amendment) Bill, 2005, which culminated in the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005.55. Section 107A now reads … Subject to the provisions of this Act, the term of every patent granted, after the commencement of the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 (38 of 2002), and the term of every patent which has not expired and has not ceased … of patent was up to December 09, 2019. In this regard, he relied upon Section 7(1B) read with Section 53 of the Patents Act.14. He next contended that the earlier consent decree operates asres judicata and/or as issue

Bayer Corporation vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

of the fact that the term "importing" was specifically included in Section 107A of the Act by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005, without any mention of the word export" or "offering for sale". This clearly indicates that the legislature did … laws in the guise of "scientific inquiry," when inquiry has definite, cognizable, and not insubstantial commercial purposes.‖ that 53. Soon after this judgment, the US Congress enacted a law permitting use of patented products in experiments for

Vidya Drolia Vs. Durga Trading Corporation

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

which records for the reason of recommending the omission as: “Thus, it can be seen that after the Amendment Act of 2019, Section 11 (6-A) has been omitted because appointment of arbitrators is to be done institutionally, in … to that commercial understanding a sense of business efficacy. xx xx xx 53. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, should in my view be interpreted … High Court or the person or institution designated by such Court is final and no appeal including Letters Patent Appeal shall lie against such decision. (8) The Chief Justice or the (8) The Supreme Court or, as

Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. Vs. Novo Nordisk a/S

Court : US Supreme Court

Subject : Land Acquisition

drug that would infringe a brand manufacturer’s patent. To facilitate the approval of generic drugs as soon as patents allow, the Hatch-Waxman Amendments require a brand manufacturer to submit its patent numbers and expiration dates, §355(b)(1); and … a brand manufacturer’s patent. To facilitate the approval of generic drugs as soon as patents allow, the Hatch-Waxman Amendments require a brand manufacturer to submit its patent numbers and expiration dates, §355(b)(1); and FDA regulations require a … the use of repaglinide with TZDs or its use alone.      In 2005, Caraco filed an ANDA seeking to market a generic version of repaglinide. … sale.” 21 U. S. C. §355(j)(2)(A)(vii)(IV). Such filing is treated as an act of infringement, giving the brand an immediate right to sue and resulting … two ways. First, it may submit a so-called section viii statement asserting that it will market the … scrivener’s errors. See, e.g., TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U. S. 19, 31 (2001) (refusing to adopt

Astrazeneca Ab & Ors vs.p Kumar & Anr

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

therefore, seen the meaning of ―invention‖, we may now advert to Section 3 as it stands after the amendment of the Act in 2005. twin the 34. For the purpose of deciding the aforesaid dispute, reference may … from selling, marketing or dealing with TICAGRELOR tablet or any drug which is in violation of the registered patents of the plaintiffs being IN907 IN984 and IN674 On 23.04.2018 a similar interim order was passed in IA … the class being no more those compounds.‖ theoretical penumbra around than a 53. In Eli Lilly & Company Ltd. v. Apotex Pty Ltd.(supra), the court

B. Braun Melsungen Ag and ors. Vs. Rishi Baid and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 25(1), 43(2), 48, 64 and 107

Reported in : LC2009(2)292; 2009(40)PTC193(Del)

that there is a difference in the rights of patentees after the amendment to the Patents Act, 1970 which came into effect on 20.05.2003. Going … this result with a protective needle guard for use with a hypodermic needle. It is, however, alleged that patents applied for by several parties were cited and overcome in the plaintiff's patent applications in India and other … conducted by the plaintiffs in the defendants plant between 10th -12th October, 2005. The report is at page 213 of the plaintiffs' documents. Clause 2.3.4, … mentioned on the certificate is a typographical error. He submitted that what is of relevance in terms of Section 53 is that the term of the patent is from the date of filing. This being the position, there