Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... stand. the leaned counsel for the respondent submitted that they are defending only the claims as amended. the amended claims were sent to the controller, who has given his opinion that the amendment does not fall within s.59 of the patents act. this opinion was also furnished to both the parties so that they could respond to it ..... to determine whether the sensor (16) operates correctly. 2. a method as claimed in claim 1, comprising the step of providing a plurality of operating parameters simultaneously or successively for the comparison with the flow speed detected by the sensor (16). 3. wind power installation, comprising: a plurality of rotor blades driven by a medium a ..... . sandoz 678 f.3d 1280 where the court asked if anyone would have modified the lead compound to make the chained compound with a reasonable expectation of success. he submitted that hindsight analysis is not permitted (generica uk ltd trading as mylan vs yeda [2012 ewhc 1848]).he cited passages from the above decision .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... interest . therefore, we have to understand the perspective from which the chapter of compulsory licence was introduced and is still there in the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendment) act, 2005. the ayyangar report is the document we refer to when a question of importance arises. it says, there is no uniformity in the ..... are subsequent to the compulsory licence application. the explanation says that the reasonable period that is required to decide if the compulsory licence applicant has been successful in his efforts to obtain a voluntary licence is a period not ordinarily exceeding a period of six months. section 84(7) specifies the conditions which ..... of drug invention is long drawn and expensive, and that several trials and experiments must be made at the laboratory for hours together before the drugs are successfully launched and many of the experiments would end up in failure and loss. therefore, they had spent huge amounts in research and development for invention and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... was obvious. 8. the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the intention of the act is to grant the patent and not to deny the patent. according to the learned counsel the respondent did not exercise his discretion to allow amendment. according to the learned counsel, in the invention the ratio between modified liquid carrier ..... innovation but ordinary common sense. 36. in this case, we find from the prior arts that the bioactive agent ccfa was being administered with a degree of success in achieving sustained release; the vehicle in which the drug was administered parentarally, orally or otherwise was by mixing it with non aqueous liquid carrier heating it ..... solution encompassed by the patents claims. ksr also says that if pursuit of known options within the technical grasp of the person skilled art leads to the anticipated success it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense . 37. if we apply the windsurfing tests, the obviousness is clear: .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... vi. submitted that claim 2 of the impugned patent discloses about the variations are by a predetermined amount in one direction, starting from the initial setting or successively in two opposing directions. us 041 patent discloses the yaw error in fig.9 which is an operational setting of the turbine, that can be varied in clockwise ..... the claims were part of the claims as originally filed and granted. prayer is made to the appellate board to consider these revised and amended claims as filed under section 58 of the act, in case the appellate board decides to conclude that the granted claims cannot be held valid and revoking the entire patent. 16 the ..... only on 22-4-2009 raising the question of patentability under the law and the patentee who is the respondent in the revocation application has not sought necessary amendments immediately within a reasonable period, to avert such patentability issue, but the necessity of which never arose until the same was challenged now by the applicant herein .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... certificates. according to the applicant, the respondents claim that software was goods and their submission that since software could not be permitted to be registered under 1958 act they had to obtain registration under section 9, 11 and 16 could not be accepted since what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. it was ..... the above paragraph also shows that because of the registration and the continuance of the mark on the register, the applicant must be prevented from doing that act which he could lawfully do otherwise but for the existence of the mark on the register. today the applicant has changed the trade name to jupiter international ..... is identical or deceptively similar to a mark which has acquired a strong reputation. the concept of well-known trade mark has undoubtedly been introduced in the act only now. but the principles underlying this have definitely existed right from the days when the trade mark protection was given statutory recognition. we have the case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... until april 8, 2004 on the premises that the learned registrar would allow one further extension under his wide discretionary powers under section 127 of the trade marks act, 1999 on april 7, 2004 the appellants attorneys intimated the learned registrar that it would be relying on the facts stated in the notice of opposition as ..... on record on the grounds that the learned registrar is vested with discretionary powers to take the evidence on record under section 127(a) f the trade marks act, 1999 in the interest of justice. the bonafide circumstance of the delay was duly explained and the learned registrar did not exercise his discretionary powers and dismiss ..... these rules also formed by central government under section 157 (1) (xxxvi) to carry out the scheme and the provision of the aforesaid section 131 of the act, therefore, the opponents cannot plead that the extension of time to file evidence in support of opposition under section 131 can be granted for unlimited period without reading .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... that the interlocutory petition was argued ex parte please be noted that on the basis of assignment deed dated 27th october, 1999, the applicant filed one tm-16 for amendment of name of the applicant as bhupinder jain trading as mahaver rice traders ..kindly do the needful. therefore the grievance of the appellant that he did not know that ..... grand, defendant (xiii)(1996) 6 scc 660 united bank of india, appellant vs. naresh kumar and others, respondents 6. pending the appeal, the respondent has filed an application to amend the cause title in view of the fact that the trade mark has been assigned in favour of respondent no.3, jain riceland pvt. ltd. 7. we will first take ..... heard before the amendment was allowed. 20. in air 1954 sc 526 (cited supra) the supreme court held that any other sufficient reason in order 47 rule 1 is a reason analogous to those specified in the rule. 21. in air 1995 sc 455 (cited supra) the honble supreme court held that the review court shall not act as an appellate .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... in respect of specification no.191793 filed under patent application number 861/del/2000 on 25th september, 2000 which was opposed under section 25 existed before the patent (amendment) act, 2005 by m/s. newage laminators pvt. ltd. brief facts of the case 2. m/s. shriram institute of industrial research, new delhi filed their application ..... .1.2004. 3. m/s. newage laminators pvt. ltd. (the appellant) opposed the grant of patent under section 25 existed before the patent (amendment) act, 2005. the assistant controller of patents and designs heard the matter on 16th november, 2005 and dismissed the opposition while directing the applicant to make the following ..... for insufficiency of description. it has not been proposed by the applicant/respondent. however the applicant/respondent agreed to amend the specification as directed by the controller. such amendment is permissible under section 57(6) of the act. 12. if we see the direction of the controller we find that it has been for the correction .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... predecessor-in-business of respondent no.1) has been manufacturing and selling ganga water filters by himself and named his company as vijaya enterprises and he is very successful in his business. in the next paragraph of the same article it says that initially mr. murlikrishna was distributor for andhra pradesh only but now he is ..... allowing the application to be advertised, the respondent no.2 ought to have issued cross notice for the same to the applicant herein under the provisions of the act. 6. mr. devinder kumar singhal, constituted attorney for the respondent no.1 filed counter-statement to the application denying the material averments made in the application ..... in the impugned trade mark, as no such rights exist with it; that the registration of the impugned trade mark is contrary to the provisions of the act; that the respondent no.1 has obtained the impugned trade mark registration fraudulently and by making misstatement and, by making misrepresentation as a manufacturer; that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... ) the registrar is also misdirected himself by carving out a superficial distinction between clocks and watches and allowed the impugned mark to be registered subject to amendment of the specification of the goods to read as watches and parts thereof included in class 14 but excluding clocks . this finding is contrary to the ..... the registrar in the opposition proceeding. 12. the main purpose of trade mark registration is to protect the distinguishing power of the trade mark. the act seeks to protect the commercial value of the mark that are registered. an infringer slowly whittles away the trade marks distinctiveness. why are the appellant herein ..... registrar has also failed to evaluate judicially the list of purported registration furnished by the respondent as it is incomplete in several respects and he has acted on absolute faith on respondents submissions. the registrar has been overwhelmed by the co-existence of the appellants and respondents jaguar mark in some jurisdictions without .....
Tag this Judgment!