Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2007(4)KarLJ686; 2007(4)KCCRSN260; 2007(3)AIRKarR40.
..... at the chennai office.2. the affidavit, inter alia; discloses the significant changes that have been brought about in the patents act, 1970 by the amending act of 2005; that the present procedure for processing the applications is now streamlined comparable to similar processing procedures undertaken elsewhere in other developed ..... places on record an affidavit dated 19-4-2005, sworn to by sri mannargudy sundararaman venkataraman, assistant controller of patents and designs, patent office, chennai2. the affidavit inter alia, points out that sweeping changes have been brought about by the amendment act of 2005 to the parent patent act of 1970 and some major changes such as ..... omission of section 5 of the principal act, having taken place and changed statutory position substantially alters the grounds on which the persons .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009(1)AWC366(SC); LC2008(3)31; 2008(38)PTC6(SC); 2008(11)SCALE524; (2008)10SCC368
..... 293/06 was filed in the high court, chapter xix of the parent act as amended vide patents (amendment) act, 1999 continued to be in operation notwithstanding the enactment of the patents (amendment) act, 2002 and the patents (amendment) act, 2005 as the amended sections 116 and 117a were brought into force only vide notification dated 2.4 ..... amendments to sections 116 and 117a suggested by section 47 of the patents (amendment) act, 2002, on 4.4.2005 the legislature enacted the patents (amendment) act, 2005. even here, not all provisions were simultaneously brought into force. only certain sections of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 were brought into force.13. vide section 23 of the patents (amendment) act, 2005, ..... 293/06 in the high court under section 116, as it stood on 19.10.06 under the patents (amendment) act, 1999. on that date, the amended section 117a, suggested by patents (amendment) act, 2005, was not brought into force. on 19.10.06 the old law prevailed under which an appeal lay .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2003)1UPLBEC496
..... writ petition against the labour court award has been specifically excluded by the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act. 1962 as amended by the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act, 1981. sri baghel referred to and relied on judgment of apex court in : [1996]2scr224 , firdosh fatima ..... further contended that appellant has not challenged the vires of the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1962 or 1981 amendment act in this special appeal, hence he cannot be allowed to raise the said submission. he further contended that ..... ors. v. deputy director of consolidation and ors., had upheld the validity of the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1962 as well as amendment act 33 of 1972. the relevant constitutional entries pertaining to state legislature regarding abolition of special appeals in the high court has been .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : LC2009(1)22; 2008(37)PTC56(Del)
..... official gazette. 22. on the date when the instant appeals were filed, chapter xix of the principal act, i.e. the patents act, 1970 as amended vide amendment act of 1999 continued to be operative notwithstanding the enactment of the patent amendment act, 2002 and the patent amendment act, 2005 since section 47 of the amendment act of 2002 which replaced chapter xix was being brought into force.23. 2 notifications were published in the ..... for the respondent urged that the tribunals can hear an appeal only against orders passed under sub-section 4 of section 25 of the patent amendment act, 1970 as amended by the patent amendment act of 2002 read with the patent amendment act, 2005. counsel urged that the amended provisions came into force on 2.4.2007. counsel wondered as to how can a board hear an appeal against an order passed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : LC2010(1)278
..... fao no. 293/06 in the high court under section 116, as it stood on 19.10.06 under the patents (amendment) act, 1999. on that date, the amended section 117a, suggested by patents (amendment) act, 2005, was not brought into force. on 19.10.06 the old law prevailed under which an appeal lay before the high ..... 06 and fao no. 293/06. we have to decide the fate of these pending appeals. one more aspect needs to be mentioned. under the patents (amendment) act, 2005, appeal is provided to the appellate board against the order of the controller under section 25(4). however, that statutory appeal is maintainable only in ..... passed by the controller of patents (controller.) either allowing or rejecting a pre-grant opposition filed under section 25(1) of the patents act, 1970 (patents act.).2. before discussing the facts of the individual cases the scheme of the patents act, particularly after the amendment to the relevant provisions by way of patents (amendment) act, 2005 (amendment act.) as well as the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR2007All90
..... upheld the validity of the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1962 as well as amendment act 33 of 1972. the relevant constitutional entries pertaining to state legislature regarding abolition of special appeals in the high court has been considered by ..... in firdosh fatima's case (supra). there is no scope for any argument regarding challenge to vires of the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act, 1981. the constitution bench of this courtin hasinuddin khan and ors. v. deputy director of consolidation and ors. 0044/1979 : [1980]2scr1207 had ..... paragraph 49:49. the second limb of submission of counsel for the appellant was to the effect that the uttarpradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act, 1981 is ultra vires. the counsel for the respondents has rightly pointed out that there being no prayer in the special appeal for declaring the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2007)4MLJ1153
..... of a known process; machine or aparatus unless such known process results in a new product or employs atleast one new reactant.section 3(d) as amended by the patents (amendment) act, 2005 with effect from 01.01.2005: the mere discovery of a new form of a known substance which does not result in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance or the ..... parties on both sides and then passes an order, either granting the patent or rejecting the patent application, by giving reasons. prior to the amended section was brought into the statute book by the patent (amendment) act, 2005 (act 15/2005) with effect from 01.01.2005, it was preceded by ordinance 7/2004 containing the proposed amendment to be made to section 3(d). in the earlier portion of this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2006(3)CHN577
..... is set aside and the matter is remitted to the controller.11. the position is disputed by counsel for the petitioners. according to him, even after the patents (amendment) act, 2005, doing away with the regime of grant of exclusive marketing rights, the application submitted by the petitioners for such right has not lost its utility. he points ..... the examiner . he was bound to give due regard to it.9. it is argured by counsel for the respondents that in view of provisions of the patents (amendment) act, 2005, section 78, nothing remains to be decided in the present case. he says that in view of that section 78 application of the petitioners, if is directed ..... the petitioners was not pending, and rather it had been disposed of before the cut off date, i.e. january 1, 2005.12. his contention is that provisions of section 78 of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 have no manner of application to proceedings which had stood concluded before the appointed date. he argues that if today the impugned .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... as a pre-grant opposition under section 25(1) of the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendment) act 2005 as the notice of opposition was filed on december 14, 2004, i.e. prior to the coming into force of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 is again unsubstantiated by the prejudice, if any, caused to the ..... .2006. by then the patents (amendment) ordinance, 2004 had come into force amending the patents act, 1970 with effect from 01.01.2005 which was later replaced by the patents (amendment) act, 2005. it is interesting to note that specific instructions under para 7 of office instruction 1/2005 dated 14.01.2005 in view of patents (amendment) ordinance, 2004, were ..... any decision, order or direction of the controller. but this section 47 of the patents (amendment) act, 2002 as further amended by the section 60 of the 2004 ordinance and as further amended by section 61 of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 has yet not been brought into force even on the date of hearing by respondent .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009(3)BomCR896; 2009(111)BomLR479
..... ), which forms part of the agreement establishing the world trade organization (wto). thereafter, the patents amendment act 15 of 2005 was brought into 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 technical invention is monetary reward. in the ..... case of machines or apparatus it is impossible to keep the invention secret since knowledge of the invention may be obtained by dismantling the machine. if a patent is obtained for the .....
Tag this Judgment!