Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents act 1970 39 of 1970 section 120 unauthorised claim of patent rights Page 16 of about 1,092 results (0.145 seconds)

Puneet Kaushik and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... section 39 patents act, 1970 stipulates that an indian resident is prohibited from applying for a patent for an invention outside india unless either one of two conditions is satisfied:i) written permission by or on behalf of the controller for grant of a patent is obtained, or ii) an application for a patent for the same invention has been made in india and either no direction has been given under subsection (1) of section 35 in relation to the application or all such directions have been revoked and a period of six weeks have elapsed.20 ..... international filing date the date of receipt of the international application, provided that that office has found that, at the time of receipt: (i) the applicant does not obviously lack, for reasons of residence or nationality, the right to file an international application with the receiving office, (ii) the international application is in the prescribed language, (iii) the international application contains at least the following elements: (a) an indication that it is intended as an international application, (b) the designation of at ..... the appellants claim to have filed a patent co-operation treaty (pct) application (international application) before the indian patents office (india) on 14.09.2012 enclosing therewith the following documents: i) form-25 (in duplicate) ii) power of attorney for form-25 (copy) iii) pct request along with declaration of inventorship (in duplicate) iv) pct power of attorney v) complete specification along .....

Kendall Vs. Winsor

Court : US Supreme Court

..... that under said section of said act, if the machines used by the defendants were purchased or constructed by them before the application of the plaintiff for his patent, without the knowledge of the plaintiff, and without his notifying the defendants of his claim as the inventor, and requiring them to desist from such construction, then they must be held to possess the right to use, and vend to others to use, the machines so purchased or constructed; and the jury are to inquire ..... invention in virtue of the seventh section of the act of congress of the 3d of march, 1839, which section provides "that every person or corporation who has or shall have purchased or constructed any newly invented machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, prior to the application of the inventor or discoverer for a patent shall be held to possess the right to use, and vend to others to be used, the specific machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, so made or purchased, without liability therefor to the inventor or any other person ..... that under said section of said act, if the machines used by the defendants were purchased or constructed by them before the application of the plaintiff for his patent, with the knowledge of the plaintiff, then they must be held to possess the right to use, and vend to others to be used, the machines so purchased or constructed; and the jury are to inquire into and find only the fact of such purchase or construction, and that the plaintiff had knowledge of the .....

Smelting Company Vs. Kemp

Court : US Supreme Court

..... so, and his right had been supported as to all of them, and the patent had been issued for all of these claims, and each of them described in the patent, there would have been no objection to the patent; but it was not competent for him to consolidate these claims and put them all in as one claim, and upon notice given as one claim, and publication as one claim, and proceeding throughout as one claim embracing 164 acres," ..... "to avoid the grant in any court for irregularities in the conduct of those who are appointed by the government to supervise the progressive course of the title from its commencement to its consummation in a patent;" but there were some things so essential to the validity of a contract, that the great principles of justice and of law would be violated did there not exist some tribunal to which an injured ..... act of 1870 are also conclusive of the right of the purchaser of claims to a patent, for it is with reference to it that the derivative right ..... had been made in the office of the entry-taker in the country where the lands patented were situated prior to the cession to the united states was admissible under the ninth section, for without such entry they would not be within the reservation mentioned in the act of cession. ..... section declared that every right claimed by any person to lands which were not acquired in this mode, or by purchase or inheritance from parties who did so acquire them, or which were obtained in fraud or evasion of the provisions of the act .....

Bajaj Auto Ltd. Bombay Pune Road, Vs. Tvs Motor Company Ltd.,

Court : Chennai

..... was guilty of infringement of their patent.48.the right to begin as provided under or.18 r.1 cpc has to be considered in the light of section 101 and 103 of patent act.49.the suit filed by the defendant in c.s.no.1111/2007 was in the nature of a counter claim. ..... defendant on 1 september 2007 which was impliedly admitted by the defendant on september 3, 2007 as groundless, falls within the scope of section 106 of the patents act, 1970. ..... provision, court should be satisfied that the plaintiff has complied with the requirements (a) and (b) of section 105.22.section 106 of the patents act, permits the court to give relief in case of groundless threat or infringement. ..... established, plaintiff is entitled to move the court under section 106 of the patent act against the threat of infringement action issued by the defendant ..... plaintiff against the defendant praying for the following reliefs :-"(a) declaring that the threats held out by the defendant on september 1 and 3, 2007 that the plaintiff is infringing the defendant's patent no.195904 and the defendant is proposing to take infringement action against plaintiff are unjustified; (b)declaring that the plaintiff's product tvs flame which uses two spark plug with screw-fitted sleeve ..... premises, plaintiff has adopted the dubious task of proving that the threat was groundless and that they were entitled for a declaration of non-infrintement.21.section 105 of the patents act, 1970 empowers the court to make a declaration as to non-infringement. .....

Bayer Corporation Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary, Department ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... clear from the fact that the phrase, manufacture in india was deleted from erstwhile section 90 of the patents act in the year 2002 which is now section 84(7) of the patents act thus, negating the requirement of local manufacture in order to make it consistent with ..... adequate extent or is not being so worked to the fullest extent that is reasonably practicable, or (e) if the working of the patented invention in the territory of india on a commercial scale is being prevented or hindered by the importation from abroad of the patented article by (i) the patentee or persons claiming under him; or (ii) persons directly or indirectly purchasing from him; or (iii) other persons against whom the patentee is not taking ..... in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare, and to a balance of rights and obligations; (d)that patents granted do not impede protection of public health and nutrition and should act as instrument to promote public interest specially in sectors of vital importance for socio-economic and technological development of india; (e)that patents granted do not in any way prohibit central government in taking measures to protect ..... is still there in the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendment) act, 2005. ..... patientsbottles per month (required)bottles imported in 2008bottles imported in 2008bottles imported in 2010liver cancer~20,000~16,000~16,000nil~200 bottlesunknownkidney cancer~8,900~7,120~7,120dr.manish gargs affidavit is with regard to how much was supplied. .....

Spice Mobiles Ltd. and Another Vs. Somasundaram Ramkumar and Others

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... counsel for the second applicant submitted that claims 12 and 13 of the impugned patent relate to mere use of multiple bluetooth devices instead of earphone/headphone jacks and such are mere replacement of headphone/earphones by known bluetooth devices and do not constitute an inventive step under section 2(1)(j) of the patents act, 1970 and hence the claims are liable to be revoked. ..... sub-section 6 of section 57 of the act reserves the right of an applicant for a patent to amend his specification or any other document related thereto to comply with the directions issued by the controller before the grant of patent. ..... sub-section 6 of section 57 of the act reserves the right of an applicant for a patent to amend his specification or any other document related thereto to comply with the directions issued by the controller beforethe grant of patent. ..... in our opinion, the corporation can initially take recourse to section 31 of the act but withdraw or abandon, it at any stage and take recourse to the provisions of section 29 of the act, which section deals with not only the rights but also provides a self-contained remedy to the corporation for recovery of ..... worthwhile noticing at this stage that a patent, unlike other intellectual property rights, does not come with a presumption. ..... authority (delhi) post the issuance of notice dated 27/1/2009 from the office of the commissioner of customs, intellectual property rights cell, had detained consignments of dual sim phones of the applicant. .....

Astrazeneca Ab & Ors vs.p Kumar & Anr

Court : Delhi

..... ptc135(del) has noted that the challenges which can be raised under the provisions of the section 64 of the patents act, 1970 are in the nature of questions dependent on facts or the mixed question of facts and laws ..... stated that the patent of the plaintiff is liable to be revoked under section 64(1)(k), section 2(1) (ja) and section 3(d) of the patent act, 1970. ..... that would in the context of pharmaceutical products, invite scrutiny of the order granting patent in the light of section 3(d) and the grounds set out in section 64 of the patents act 1970. ..... 57 3, and the legislative history behind the incorporation of chapter ii in the patents act, 1970, is disregarded, then it is possible to see section 3(d) as an extension of the definition of "invention" and to link section 3(d) with clauses (j) and (ja) of section 2(1). ..... to be disclosed in claims 1-10 of in674 it is pleaded that by virtue of section 48 of the patents act, the plaintiffs have exclusive rights to prevent others from making, using, selling, offering for sale or importing ticagrelor as well as its crystalline form (in 984) and its finished formulation (as claimed in in 674) or any other product that falls within the scope of the claims of in 907 and the above two noted patents.9. ..... it is noteworthy to mention here that the challenges which can be raised under the provisions of the section 64 of the patents act 1970 (as amended in the year 2005) are in the nature of the questions dependent on facts or the mixed question of .....

Diamond Vs. Chakrabarty

Court : US Supreme Court

..... (b) the passage of the 1930 plant patent act, which afforded patent protection to certain asexually reproduced plants, and the 1970 plant variety protection act, which authorized protection for certain sexually reproduced plants but excluded bacteria from its protection, does not evidence congressional understanding that the terms "manufacture" or "composition of matter" in 101 do not include ..... argument rests on the enactment of the 1930 plant patent act, which afforded patent protection to certain asexually reproduced plants, and the 1970 plant page 447 u. s. ..... [ footnote 3 ] relying on the legislative history of the 1930 plant patent act, in which congress extended patent protection to certain asexually reproduced plants, the board concluded that 101 was not intended to cover living things such as these ..... federico, a principal draftsman of the 1952 recodification, in his testimony regarding that legislation: "[u]nder section 101, a person may have invented a machine or a manufacture, which may include anything under the sun that is made by ..... necessity for caution is that much greater when we are asked to extend patent rights into areas congress has foreseen and considered, but has not resolved. ..... appears to have derived from the decision of the patent office in ex parte latimer, 1889 dec.com.pat 123, in which a patent claim for fiber found in the needle of the pinus australis ..... 120 -121 (1978), there is no basis for reading into its actions an intent to modify the plain meaning of the .....

Dhanpat Seth and ors. Vs. Nil Kamal Plastic Crates Ltd.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 2006(33)PTC339(NULL)

..... it was then argued by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs/petitioners that section 48 of the patents act, as amended by patents (amendment) act, 2002, confers upon the patentee the exclusive right to prevent third parties, who do not have his consent, from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the patented product and that in view of this provision, so long as the said patent is not revoked, nobody else can make, use, offer for sale ..... section 13(4) of the patents act, 1970 says that the validity of the patent is not warranted by the ..... the above stated position apart, section 48 of the patents act, as amended by the act of 2002, has not given the right to the patentee to seek injunction for the ..... the ones, relevant for deciding the present application, are:(i) the so-called 'device', got patented by the plaintiffs, is not an invention within the meaning of section 2(j) of the patents act, because it is not a new product; and(ii) that the suit is hit by the doctrine of ..... at page 62 of the same file there is a letter, written by the plaintiffs to the managing director of national horticulture board, wherein it is claimed that the plaintiffs have launched plastic 'kilta' in shimla on 4.4.2002 with the help of reliance in presence of minister of horticulture department, himachal pradesh and that the product was appreciated and approved by all, who ..... validity of a patent is not guaranteed by the grant, is now expressly provided in section 13(4) of the patents act, 1970. .....

Dr. (Miss) Snehlata Gupte Vs Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... if the patent holder files a suit for infringement the defendant in such a suit can by way of a counter claim challenge the validity of grant of patent (section 107 read with section 64 of the act).47. ..... even if such interested person misses the bus at the pre-grant stage, the right of such person to oppose at the post-grant stage is preserved under section 25 (2) of the act. ..... the short but interesting question of law common to all these petitions: when can a patent be said to be granted under the patents act, 1970 (act)? ..... it was submitted that an order does not become effective till such time it is communicated or made known, because it then gives valuable rights to both the holder of the patent as well as any person interested in opposing the grant of patent. ..... it is submitted that a patent is a complete monopolistic right and should be granted only after due consideration. ..... the rights of such of those post-grant opposers who are persons interested are sufficiently protected under section 25(2). ..... claiming to be among the leading scientists in their field, the petitioners state that "it is not only their duty but also their responsibility to ensure that no unscrupulous trader usurps rights of other parties or mala fidely stops other parties involved in this field. ..... the legislative intent is that the right to file a post-grant opposition under section 25 (2) is restricted to any person interested. ..... sdl is alleged to be continuing to infringe the rights of respondent no.5 with impunity. .....