Advanced Search Results

J. Mitra and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Controller of Patents and Desig. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Indian Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 8, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 25(1), 25(2), 25(4), 27, 28, 29(2), 29(3), 51, 54, 57, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66, 69(3), 78, 84, 84(1) to 84(5), 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 116, 116(1), 116(2), 117A, 117A(2), 117G and 158; Patents (Amendment) Act, 1999 - Sections 116; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 - Sections 47; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 83; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 - Sections 23, 25 and 61

Reported in : 2009(1)AWC366(SC); LC2008(3)31; 2008(38)PTC6(SC); 2008(11)SCALE524; (2008)10SCC368

a classic illustration of the confusion which has emerged on account of the postponement of in-part commencement of Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005.4. Quite often the commencement of an Act is postponed to some specified future date or to such date … Section 17, Section 18, Section 19, Section 20, Section 25, Section 27, Section 28, Section 51, Section 54, Section 57, Section 60, Section 61, Section 63, Sub-section (3) of Section 69, Section 78, Section 84, Section 86, Section

Span Diagnostic Vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Design and anr ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 83; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 8, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 25(1), 25(2), 25(3), 25(4), 27, 28, 29(2), 29(3), 37, 41, 42, 47, 51, 54, 57, 59 to 63, 66, 69(3), 74, 78, 84(1) to 84(5), 85, 86, 88, 88(3), 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 116, 116(1), 116(2), 117, 117A, 117A(2), 117G and 158; Patents Amendment Act, 2002 - Sections 1(2), 18 and 47; Patents Amendment Act, 2005 - Sections 1(1), 1(2), 23, 60 and 61; Patents Amendment Act, 1999

Reported in : LC2009(1)22; 2008(37)PTC56(Del)

notification issued in the year 2007 as also the further amendment to the Patents Act, 1970 by the Patents Amendment Act, 2005, again bringing into effect the provisions of the said Amendment Act on 2 different dates. 3. As I … 47 of the Patents Amendment Act, 2002 was omitted. Further, vide Section 61 of the Amendment Act of 2005, Section 117A of the principal Act as inserted by Section 47 of the Patents Amendment Act, 2002 was also … Section 17, Section 18, Section 19, Section 20, Section 25, Section 27, Section 28, Section 51, Section 54, Section 57, Section 60, Section 61, Section 63, Sub-section (3) of Section 69, Section 78, Section 84, Section 86, Section

Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. a Company Incorporated Under the Companies Act ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2(1), 6, 8, 10, 11, 11A, 11B, 12, 13, 14, 35 to 42, 47, 47(1), 47(2), 47(3), 47(4), 48, 57, 58, 64, 64(1), 64(3), 99, 100, 100(1), 101(3), 101(5), 103, 107, 156, 177 and 240; Patents and Designs Act, 1911; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005; Patents (Amendment) Ordinance, 2005; Patents Rules, 2003; General Clauses Act, 1897 - Sections 3(23)

Reported in : 2009(3)BomCR896; 2009(111)BomLR479

force by way of ordinance, namely, Patents (Amendment) Ordinance 2005 dated 26.12.2004 and ultimately was enacted as the Patents Amendment Act, 2005 which has made substantial changes. To the inventor a patent system confers certain definite advantages. The incentive for … of a patent outside India in contravention of Section 39;(o) that leave to amend the complete specification under Section 57 or Section 58 was obtained by fraud.(p) that the complete specification does not disclose or wrongly mentions the

M/S. Philips Electronics India Limited Vs. M/S. Asian Electronics Limi ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Land Acquisition

Matched in: Judge The Honourable Smt. Justice Prabha Sridevan, Chairman &Amp; D.P.S. Parmar, Technical Member (Patents)

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 … clinical testing to supply information to the FDA, but only general biomedical research to identify new pharmaceutical compounds." 57. The US Supreme Court judgment unanimously reversed the Federal Circuit judgment and disapproved the narrow interpretation of the

M/S. Iritech Inc vs.the Controller of Patents

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

makes a request in the prescribed manner for such examination within the prescribed period. (2) Omitted by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 In case of an application in respect of a claim for a (3) patent filed under sub-section (2) … Power of Controller to correct clerical “S.78. errors etc.- (1) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in sections 57 and 59 as regards amendment of applications for patents or complete specifications or other documents related thereto and

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

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2(1), 3, 5(2), 11A(7), 11B, 12, 13(4), 14, 25(1), 25(2), 28, 43, 47, 48, 64, 83, 84, 92, 92A and 107; Companies Act, 1956; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 - Sections 3; Trade Marks Act - Sections 31; Essential Commodities Act, 1953; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 7, Rule 11 - Order 39, Rule 1; Drug Price Control Order

Reported in : 159(2009)DLT243; LC2009(2)1; 2009(40)PTC125(Del)

that in terms of the second proviso to Section 11-A(7) of the Patents Act 1970, introduced by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 (effective from 1st January, 2005), in case of patent applications filed under Section 5 (2) [which concerns a … counter claim it was averred that the suit patent, i.e., Patent No. 196774 [corresponding to US Patent No. 5747498 - hereafter U.S.'498] had been obtained by the plaintiffs by suppression of material information. It was stated in

Chemithon Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Secretary, Department of Atomic Ener ...

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 25(2), 39, 52(1), 52(2), 57, 65 and 125; ;Urban Lands (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 - Section 20; ;Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959; ;Patent Rules, 2003 - Rule 4 and 4(2); ;Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 20 and 141; ;Constitution of India - Articles 32, 226(1), 226(2) and 227

gas emissions by and under Application No. 31/Bom/1999. This application was made on 12.01.1999 to the Controller of Patents and Designs and Trademarks at Bombay. The respondent No. 1 is directly involved in basic research in nuclear … 1970. On November 20, 2006, Government of India filed an application for amendment of the specifications of the patent. The appellant filed a notice of … of the respondent No. 1 being Patent No. 194122 on April 26, 2005. On 20th August, 2006, Dr. V.V. Rao, respondent No. 5, filed post … of the opposition so that the proposed amendments in the claims may be notified and the proceedings under Section 57 of the Act be first disposed of. This letter was, however withdrawn and date was fixed on August

Fdc Ltd., Represented by Its Joint Managing Director Vs. Sanjeev Khand ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Intellectual Property

Matched in: Judge The Honourable Ms. S. Usha, Vice Chairman &Amp; the Honourable Mr. D.P.S. Parmar, Technical Member(Patents)

Novartis Ag Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property

agreement, the Patents Act, 1970, was subjected to large scale changes in three stages; and finally, by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005, section 5 was altogether deleted from the Parent Act (Patents Act, 1970). Between January 1, 1995 and January 1, … for the debate.5. Jürg Zimmermann invented a number of derivatives of N-phenyl-2- pyrimidine-amine, one of which is CGP 57148[1]. in free base form (later given the International Nonproprietary Name ‘Imatinib’ by the World Health Organisation). These derivatives,