Article
Patent application disposal – Quantity at the cost of quality?
By Harshita Singh
The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses at length the recent decision of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (‘IPAB’) in the case of Wisig Networks Private Limited v. Controller. The IPAB set aside the patent refusal order passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Designs after noting that it was totally void of reasoning. Observing that the case was a victim of hurried disposal of the patent applications, the IPAB held that although certain degree of check on quantitative performance of the officers at the IPO is essential, but the qualitative performance of the officers cannot be ignored. It also stated that there is a need for quality management and that the rule of providing reasoning in the order should be observed in proper spirit. Highlighting the importance of a reasoned order, the author is also of the view that for an applicant, getting to know the reasons for refusal of a patent is as much important as getting a merit-based grant to a patent. The author also notes that passing an order for rejecting the grant of a patent under Section 15 of the Patents Act without providing any reasoning is an abuse of the powers conferred on the Controller...
Ratio Decidendi
- Standard Essential Patents – Confidentiality Clubs and fixing of FRAND rates – Prayer for keeping certain documents inaccessible to defendant, unacceptable – Delhi High Court
- Trademark passing off – Fact of being first in world is irrelevant – Goodwill and reputation in India to be established – Delhi High Court
- Design infringement – District Court can allow withdrawal of suit, even after Section 19 defence is taken – Bombay High Court
- Trademarks – Confusion over ‘SERO’ and ‘SERON’ – Bombay High Court
News Nuggets
- Protected Designation of Origin – Reproduction of physical characteristics of product covered by PDO, when prohibited
- Patents – Cases involving same applicant and title, common inventors, similar subject matter, should be referred to same Examiner-Controller pair
- Indian Patent Office need to focus on quality management of national phase applications: IPAB
- Patents – Double request for examination caused inadvertently deserves to be condoned
- Pre-grant oppositions – IPAB lays down guiding principles
- M&M’s new Roxor model not violates FCA’s Jeep trade dress
