Asia IP
Search Result
Novartis v. Natco imparts clarity on examination and opposition process under Patents Act being parallel but independent
In a decision dated January 9, 2024, the Delhi High Court clarified that the examination and opposit...
Delhi High Court demystifies law on product-by-process claims
Key findings from India’s first litigation elaborating on product-by-process patent
The Scheme of the Patents Act and Rules obligates the Hearing Officer to pass orders within a reasonable period, says the Delhi High Court
In a slew of matters, the Delhi High Court (DHC) emphasized the need to adhere to the principle of n...
India: The perils of not naming the correct inventors
When an invention is created by the joint efforts of many persons, all of them qualify to be named a...
India: The Delhi High Court’s Decision in OpenTV
Arguably, Section 3(k) and Section 59 objections are the most recurring objections during the examin...
India: Understanding public use and the loss of novelty
The novelty requirement is the sine qua non of every patent law.
AI as inventor: Thaler’s legal team laments flawed decision by Australian court
Standfirst: Errors stem from various factors including misinterpretation of the Patents Act
Is Section 3(d) of India’s Patents Act a workable provision? The long-term effect.
On April 1, 2013, the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark decision in the Novartis Glivec ca...