Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... letter dated 27.4.2007 that the observations offered by them had been carefully considered, but this office is of the opinion that the same is not acceptable, therefore the same objections are still maintained under section 2 (1)(j) and section 3 (1) of the act, the applicants agent were by this office letter offered an opportunity of being heard on the 29th may, 2007 on the objections communicated to them. 10. ..... to and are judge solely by the eye; but does not include any mode or principle of construction or anything which is in substance a mere mechanical device, and does not include any trade mark as defined in clause (v) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 or property mark as defined in section 479 of the indian penal code or any artistic work as defined in clause ..... the appellant argued that in absence of any prior art citation, novelty and inventive step objection under section 2(1)(j) cannot be raised does not hold good in view of the definition of inventive step given in section 2(1) (ja) reproduced below inventive step means a feature of an invention that involve technical advance as compared to existing knowledge ..in the art. ..... according to the counsel it is also clear from the descriptive portion of the specification that, unlike conventional step cut pavilions comprising three -pavilion steps, the claimed gemstone of the instant invention has four-pavilion steps that stretch from girdle to culet and rounded pavilion corners. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... ) the learned counsel for the respondents tried to support the impugned order of the trial court by submitting that the rules framed under the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 provide for the standards for fruit juice as well as four fruit beverage or fruit drinks. ..... we see no condition imposed in the act that section 57(1) and (2) can be invoked only if the registration certificate has been issued to the registered proprietor. ..... this is not a case where section 36(2) of the trade marks act, 1999 (in short act) will apply. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... countries of the union shall be independent of patents obtained for the same invention in other countries whether members of the union or not he submitted that there was an implicit recognition that patentability standards would differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and thus while interpreting section 3(d) as well as the basic standards of patentability as embodied in section 2(1)(j) and 2(1)(ja) of the act, the granting authority ought to give these concepts the strictest possible interpretation in order to fully carry out the objectives of the ..... since, it can exist in several other polymorphic forms also as has been argued by the appellant and not disputed by the respondents that no one can say with certainty that one would reach directly to beta by a generally conventionally known prior art procedure.iict and iit experiments getting only beta do not prove that any process for converting imatinib to imatinib mesylate will inevitably lead to the beta form [see paragraph 9 (xi) ..... grant. we, therefore, dispose of the present appeals and remand back the impugned application to the patent office (chennai) with the direction to the controller to grant a patent expeditiously to the appellant with the swiss convention priority on record subject to the impugned specification being amended by the appellant restricting the statement of claims to process claims only subject to the office objections raised in the first examination report dated 17th march, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... respondent, but if the whole judgement is read we find that the learned judge of the bombay high court held that it is not in all cases that the tribunal has jurisdiction to rectify the register on any ground it pleases but it is only in cases where a mark in its very nature is incapable of registration under the ..... the case from the point of view of public interest and confined the case to section 56 of the act, as would appear from the fact that while sustaining the respondent's objection under section 46(1) and (b) on the ground that the same had not been used by the appellant for the last twenty years, it was observed: "having held that section 46(1)(a) is a bar to the continuation of the impugned mark on the register as ..... the words in the course of their trade should not be given a wider meaning than intended by the legislature and if the respondents stand is accepted that the requirement of the act would be satisfied so long as the mark is used for the same purpose, in the course of the same business activity it would be a wholly incorrect interpretation of the concept ..... , because the moment one month has elapsed after the registration of a trade mark has been ordered, a trade rival can make an application on the ground set out in clause (a) of section 46 (1) claiming there has been no bona fide use of the trade mark up to a date one month before the date of his application. ..... of the applicant before a court, which had jurisdiction that there was no dispute between the parties .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the application is not for rectification of the register under section 71 of the act and no evidence has been advanced in support thereof. ..... the present application is not an appeal under section 117a and 117b of the act and no evidence in support has been filed. ..... according to the respondent, the applicant has not established how the complete specification or the claims are insufficient and therefore does not attract the provisions of section 64(1)(i) and (h) of the act. ..... the respondent is therefore restricting its response only to the provisions under section 64 of the act. 35. ..... application has been filed under sections 64, 71, 117a and 117b of the act. ..... invention as claimed in any of the claims of the complete specification is not new, having regard to what was publicly known or used before the priority date of the claim or what was published in any of the documents referred to in section 13 of the act. ..... preferred bacterial source of the probiotic is to be capable of metabolizing urea and ammonia preferably to amino acids which can be acted by the bacteria of the patient, in the prior art and obvious. ..... patent offends section 64(1)(h) of the act. 15. ..... is not an invention within the meaning of section 3(e) of the act. ..... therefore it is not an invention within the meaning of section 3(e) of the act. 13. ..... the respondent has in the impugned patent made a claim for pharmaceutical composition and also for a method of treatment in the same application which is barred under section 7(1) of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... to consider the expert affidavit and as such illustrates non application of mind; (16) that the controller failed to uphold the ground of opposition that the impugned patent is not an invention under section 25(2)(f) and that it does not constitute an invention within the meaning of section 3 (e) of the act; (17) that the controller failed to reason how, in the absence of the use of a new reactant or the process resulting in a new product, the process could get over ..... discloses a process for treating a patient having infection which comprises administering locally an effective amount of at least one microorganism strain which is similar to conventional lactobacillus strains in its morphological proportions, but different from known strains of lactobacillus in its nutritional requirements ..... . the related problem and solution provided by the present invention are conventional tablet if cloxacillin and cefixime are mixed and formulated in a conventional tablet, cloxacillin will be eliminated quickly, leading to lowering or absence of cloxacillin in the plasma, as the half life of cloxacillin ..... . this has for many years been dealt with by international convention which is reflected in domestic legislation, priority being regulated on a ..... of the invention disclosed in ep1044680 is to provide a high dosage of amoxicillin than the conventionally used in order to achieve the desired results ..... . these products are in the form of conventional capsule or tablet and not in the form of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... whatever documents are required under rule12(3) had been given and since the patent office now had several search engines, data base and is a member of the paris convention and patent cooperation treaty and is also now an international searching authority , this requirement must be read in the context of the present position. ..... find from the documents that in the letter had been sent to the respondent by the patent attorney, rule 12(3) is clearly extracted, which says, that when the controller required information to be furnished under section 8(2), the applicant must furnish information relating to the objections if any, in respect of novelty and patentability of the invention and any other particular. ..... challenge was to accommodate the requirements of these two different active ingredients in single formulation; b) further, there was a possibility of reactivity between brimonidine and timolol because the secondary amines in brimonidine can act as nucleophiles that attach the electron poor carbon-nitrogen double bonds present in timolol; c) another challenge was the use of active ingredients in two different salt forms. ..... according to the applicant, the respondent has failed to disclose to the controller the information required by section 8 of the act, in particular, the european counterpart of the subject patent which was refused vide decision dated 11.12.2007. ..... to the respondent section 8 (2) will be complied with, if he submits a copy of a granted claim in any one jurisdiction. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... : (a)that the invention so far as claimed in the application under opposition is obvious and clearly does not involve any inventive step, having regard to the matter published as mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 25 of the said act and having regard to what was used in india before the priority date of the application under opposition; (b)that the subject of the claim (s) in the said application is not an invention within the meaning ..... the invention so far as claimed in the application under opposition is obvious and clearly does not involve any inventive step, having regard to the matter published as mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 25 of the said act and having regard to what was used in india before the priority date of the application under opposition. ..... so far as claimed in the said application is obvious and clearly does not involve any inventive step, having regard to the matter published as mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 25 of the act and having regard to what was used in india before the priority date of the said application. 43. ..... that the invention so far as claimed in the said application is obvious and clearly does not involve any inventive step, having regard to the matter published as mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 25 of the act and having regard to what was used in india before the priority date of the said applications. 37. ..... then subjected to the conventional steps of film making. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... she drew our attention to section 11, section 2 (1) (zg) read with section 2 (2) (b) and (c ), proviso to section 9(1)(b), section 9(2)(a), section 11(6)(v) and section 29(1) of the act. ..... the mark mountain dew under section 9 of the trade marks act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the act) is devoid of any distinctive character and hence not eligible for registration ..... the plea raised by the petitioner under section 57 of the act as to the entry wrongly remaining on the register holds no ..... she submitted that the plea under section 47 of the act is not maintainable as the petitioner is under obligation to prove that the registration was without any bonafide intention on the part of the applicant for registration that it should be used for those goods and there has, in ..... air 1986 (1) scc 465 wherein it was held that twin elements contained in section 46(1) (a) of the act are conjunctive in character. ..... the plea of non user has been taken, for which the relevant provisions are under section 47 of the act, it is to be seen whether there had been a non-user as provided for under the said section. ..... of the conditions of section 57 of the act are satisfied. ..... submitted that the application has been filed under section 57 of the act on 19.4.2004. ..... there is nothing in the plea of the petitioner for the removal of the mark from the register under section 57(2) of the act. 10. ..... much is enough for the respondent to cross the bridge for having a successful claim under section 47(1) (b) of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the use of pure al2o3 leads to hot tearing , which means a crack appearing in the last section of the casting to solidify in which constraints are present. ..... he has stated that on 02.09.2005, an application for amendments u/s 78 of the patent act was received and that it was stated that an amendment was on account of translation error. ..... any order for amendment thereafter would be subject to s.57 and s.78 of the act which are amendments sought by application and power of controller to collect clerical errors respectively. ..... the application was published u/s 11(a) of the patents act, 1970 on 03.06.2005. ..... joshi appearing for the respondent, the four amendments, namely, solid solution to homogenous phase , consisting of to comprising of , weight to volume and roller to pad are not clerical errors and they go beyond the purview of s.78 of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!