Article
The right to cross-examine in a post-grant opposition
by Sutapa Jana
Division Bench of the Delhi High Court recently held that once the patentee has filed its reply-statement, he is not required to provide any separate reasons for cross-examination of the witnesses whose affidavits are filed by the opponent in support of its post-grant opposition. The Court was of the view that the objections in the reply-statement are the reasons for seeking cross-examination. It also observed that cross-examination of the witnesses is a touchstone for the examination-in-chief which is in the form of affidavit, and that it will only facilitate the Deputy Controller to arrive at the decision in an opposition proceeding. The article hence states that cross-examination should be allowed by the Controller when a reply-statement under Rule 59 has been filed by the patentee and the opponent seeks to rely on the depositions of its witnesses...
Statute Update
- Fees under Patents Act sought to be reduced for small entities
- Fees under Designs Act sought to be reduced for small entities and startups
Ratio decidendi
- Injunction against MAKEMYTRAVEL - Correspondence with lowest rung executive is not acquiescence – Delhi High Court
- Trademarks – Not possible to conclude on disparagement when evidence yet to be led – Delhi High Court
- Trademark licence agreement for unregistered mark is for the goodwill in specific business only – Delhi High Court
- Otrivin and Biotrivin – Passing off and not infringement of trademark – Delhi High Court
- Trademark protection when registration of mark under Design Act cancelled – Calcutta High Court
- Blocking of access to specific information – Indian Court when can grant global injunctions – Delhi High Court
News Nuggets
- Hearing of ex-parte ad interim IPR matters in separate chamber in Bombay High Court
- Trademarks – Registrar duty bound to communicate grounds for refusal
- No honest concurrent use on steady encroachment upon goodwill
- No visual and phonetic similarity between marks DOKKIO and
- Designs - Registration is no proof, even prima facie, of validity of a design
- Streamlining processing of trademark applications - HC seeks information from Registrar
