Kashishipr

OCTOBER 20, 2021

After the changes of 2005, the Madras Patent Office , in 2006, rejected the application from Novartis for the drug Glivec stating that the said drug did not exhibit any major changes in therapeutic effectiveness over its pre-existing form, which was already patented outside India.

Patent 105

Patent Intellectual Property Inventor Government 105

SpicyIP

MARCH 25, 2024

The Controller Of Patents on 15 March 2024 (Delhi High Court ) The appeal challenged the order rejecting the Appellants’ patent application under Section 15 of the Patent Act, 1970, for lack of novelty and inventive steps compared to prior art. However, the Appellants filed an application seeking leave to submit an auxiliary claim.

Trademark 52

Trademark Patent Copyright Confidentiality 52

IIPRD

FEBRUARY 23, 2021

The National IPR Policy of 2016 has resulted in increasing IP registration since its inception. The pendency in IP registration applications have also decreased. The subsidised valuation is done by government bodies like the Korea Invention Promotion Centre. Trademark as Collateral in the US. 11, March 2006.

IP 40

IP Intellectual Property Branding Brands 40

SpicyIP

DECEMBER 17, 2023

Ankit Sahni’s AI “Co-authored” Artwork Denied Registration by US, Continues to be Registered in India Can AI (co)author art? US Copyright Office says no to “RAGHAV”s work, even as the same work remains registered as a copyright in India. Emerson Process Management Power and Water Solutions Inc. Khimji Dayabhai Co.”,

IP 59

IP Trademark Advertising Advertising 59

SpicyIP

JANUARY 2, 2022

The Vidya Drolia case laid down certain conditions for non-arbitrability of disputes and stated that grant and issue of patents and registration of trademarks were exclusive sovereign or government functions, thus making them non-arbitrable. Durga Trading Corporation was clarified in this case. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.

IP 143

IP Intellectual Property Copyright Trademark 143

SpicyIP

MAY 15, 2023

Considering that the petitioner is the prior user of the mark and has an earlier registration, Delhi High Court directs the Trademarks registry to remove the respondent’s allegedly similar mark. on 8 May, 2023 (Delhi High Court) This case concerned rectification of the Trademarks Register by removing the respondent’s.

Trademark 104

Trademark Registration Cease and Desist IP 104