IPAB | IIPRD

Category: IPAB

Interpretation of the Term “Aggrieved Person” Under Section 47 of Trade Mark Act, 1999

March 17, 2016 - 6:46 am Categories: India IPAB IPAB Decisions News & Updates Trademark

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case Adidas AG v Union of India and Anr vide W.P.(C) 3125/2013 set aside the impugned ex parte order by IPAB dated 28th December 2012 and remanded the matter to IPAB for fresh consideration. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: In the instant case, Petitioner has trademark “RESPONSE” … Continue reading Interpretation of the Term “Aggrieved Person” Under Section 47 of Trade Mark Act, 1999

Plant Varieties and Farmers‟ Rights Act, 2001

January 14, 2016 - 1:25 pm Categories: India IPAB IPAB Decisions News & Updates Trademark

Ministry of Agriculture & IPAB failure in invoking the transitional provision as provided under Section 59 of The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers‟ Rights Act, 2001 for setting up a tribunal. INTRODUCTION The variety of crops both edible and for commercial purposes has grown as the size and need of the human population has … Continue reading Plant Varieties and Farmers‟ Rights Act, 2001

Revocation of Valganciclovir patent by Controller of Patents, Chennai

August 1, 2015 - 9:46 am Categories: IPAB IPAB Decisions News & Updates Patent Opposition Patents pharma Pharma/Biotech Patent Litigations Section 3(D)

Recently in a matter remanded from IPAB to Controller of Patents, Chennai, a decision of revoking Roche’s patent IN207232 for Valganciclovir was delivered after hearing both the parties. The subject patent was granted on January, 2009 followed which post grant oppositions were separately filed by CIPLA, Matrix, Ranbaxy and Bakul Pharma along with two NGOs … Continue reading Revocation of Valganciclovir patent by Controller of Patents, Chennai

CIPLA & BMS may settle patent dispute over Entecavir in India

May 30, 2015 - 12:16 pm Categories: IPAB IPAB Decisions News & Updates patent infringement Patents pharma

US based pharma major Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) and Indian pharma company Cipla Ltd. are heading towards an amicable settlement on a long-stretched patent dispute concerning BMS’ hepatitis B drug Entecavir, a leading anti-viral drug for Hepatitis B patients that brings in more than a billion dollars each year globally for BMS. Entecavir, being a pre-1995 … Continue reading CIPLA & BMS may settle patent dispute over Entecavir in India

Recent decision of IPAB in the case of E.I.DU Pont De Nemours & Company V. Galpha Laboratories and Ors

December 26, 2014 - 8:55 am Categories: IPAB IPAB Decisions News & Updates Trademark Trademark Litigation

This article is relates to a recent judgment of Intellectual Property Appellate Board (hereinafter IPAB) dated 4th December 2014 in the case “E.I.DU Pont De Nemours & Company V. Galpha Laboratories and Ors.” Brief Facts: On 11th March, 2009 the trademark registry refused the opposition of the E.I.DU Pont De Nemours & Company (appellant herein) and … Continue reading Recent decision of IPAB in the case of E.I.DU Pont De Nemours & Company V. Galpha Laboratories and Ors

Indian Patent office rejects Patent claim over Abraxane

July 19, 2014 - 12:31 pm Categories: India IPAB News & Updates Patents

In a major setback, the Indian Patent Office denied a patent to an anti cancer drug Abraxane manufactured by US-Based Abraxis BioSciences. Here we will discuss the decision given by IPO at the back drop of the arguments advanced by the respective parties. The copy of the decision made by Controller General of Patents can … Continue reading Indian Patent office rejects Patent claim over Abraxane

M/s Aditi Manufacturing Company v/s Mr. Bharat Bhogilal Patel , Section(64) patent act, 1970

May 22, 2014 - 8:13 am Categories: India IP Litigation IP Practice in India IPAB IPAB Decisions News & Updates Patents section 64

Takshasheel Bouddha, an intern at Khurana and Khurana Advocates and IP Attorneys, analyses the case, M/s Aditi Manufacturing Company v/s Mr. Bharat Bhogilal Patel &The Controllers of Patents & Designs. This judgment is with respect to Section 64 of Patent Act, 1970. Introduction: The dispute was regarding of two patents i.e. Patent No.189027 and Patent … Continue reading M/s Aditi Manufacturing Company v/s Mr. Bharat Bhogilal Patel , Section(64) patent act, 1970

Categories

Archives