Article
Patents – Delhi High Court rules on disclosure vis-à-vis invalidity on ground of obviousness
By Archana Viswanathan and Dr. Malathi Lakshmikumaran
The article in this issue of IPR Amicus elaborately discusses a recent decision of the Delhi High Court wherein the Court clarified that the mere coverage in every case does not result in obviousness. It also confirmed that the patent applications related to selection inventions may be granted, provided they satisfy three conditions. The High Court also held that coverage and disclosure are distinct concepts. According to the authors, the Court however gave a debatable justification that Chlorantraniliprole was manufactured from the Markush moiety claim by Patentee and no other manufacturer/Defendants had made any effort to manufacture CTPR all these years during which patent IN 204978 remained valid..
Statute Update
- Draft Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2021
Ratio decidendi
- Passing off – Misrepresentation occurs only when plaintiff’s prominent feature embodied in defendant’s product to lead to relevant connection – Karnataka High Court
- Trademarks – Anti-dissection rule not imposes complete embargo for considering constituent elements – Delhi High Court
- Broadcasting of copyrighted material – Supreme Court sets aside Madras HC’s interim order relaxing provisions of Rule 29(4)
- Court cannot supplant terms of the provision through judicial interpretation by re-writing statutory languages – Supreme Court
- No confusion between ‘Le-Vel’ and ‘Level’, being used for different goods – European Union’s General Court
- No similarity between goods even if distribution channels overlap – European Union’s General Court
News Nuggets
- Passing off in ‘get up’ or packaging – Karnataka High Court summarises principles
- Design claim is limited to article of manufacture identified in the claim
- Confusing and deceptive similarity between ‘ALDIGESIC P’ and ‘ALGESIC P’
- Dispute after 3½ years of defendant’s registration – No injunction at interim stage against defendant without opportunity to respond
- Passing off by a registered trademark – Suit maintainable
- ‘Namkeen’ is allied and cognate product to ‘Gajjak’ and ‘Rewari’
