Article
Exploring the requirement of sufficiency of disclosure in patent specification
By Anurag Pandey and Thiagarajan Srinivasan
The article in this issue of IPR Amicus attempts to provide few insights into the sufficiency of disclosure in a patent specification. The authors note that according to the Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications in the field of pharmaceuticals issued by the Indian Patent Office, a complete specification must be sufficient to enable the whole width of the claimed invention to be carried out and also provide the best method of performing the invention, and that the sufficiency of disclosure is a universal requirement in the patent system. Discussing various decisions of the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs, IPAB and High Courts, the authors conclude that there is no rule of thumb regarding the number of working examples that need to be provided in a patent specification to meet the requirement of sufficiency of disclosure. According to the authors, while one example which is the best method of working the invention known to the applicant is sufficient to meet the requirement of Section 10(4)(b), the fact remains that where a range is claimed it is imperative to have examples covering the entire range. Such examples would be of great help not only during prosecution but also defend during litigation...
Ratio decidendi
- Patents - Section 48(a) prevents manufacturing of patented drugs even for export – Delhi High Court
- Copyrights - Unique perception of Marathas in a positive light, by itself, is not a copyrightable element – Bombay High Court
- Copyrights – Liability to remove violating content when URLs not provided to intermediary - Court of Additional District Judge, Gurugram
- No copyright in sequences of events resulting from choice of setting - United States District Court in the Southern District of New York
News Nuggets
- Streamlining processing of trademark applications – Delhi High Court directs Trade Mark Registry to file better affidavit
- Marks “LLOYD” and “PULSE” are well-known trademarks
- Trademarks – Likelihood of confusion where marks conceptually identical and visually similar
- Geographical Indications - Protection of name ‘Aceto Balsamico di Modena’ not extends to use of terms like ‘aceto’ and ‘balsamico’
