UDRP domain name complaints based on Bad faith- Good outcomes!

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) recently issued an interesting decision in a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) proceeding, in Philip Morris Products S.A. v. Konstantin Danilidi Case No. D2024-0008. Philip Morris Products S.A. (the “Complainant”) contended that the disputed domain name <> was registered and is being used in bad faith by Konstantin Danilidi […]

India- Permissibility of claim amendments in the context of methods of agriculture or horticulture

The Delhi High Court recently set aside an order issued by the Assistant Controller of Patents (the “Respondent”) against Mitsui Chemicals Inc (the “Appellant”) refusing their Patent Application. Background: The Respondent refused the Patent Application No. 3877/DELNP/2009 citing non-patentability under Section 3(h) of the Patents Act, 1970 (as amended) (the “Act”) (which stipulates that inventions […]

The Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2024: key highlights

In a significant move to streamline the Indian patent practice and procedures, the Indian Ministry of Commerce and Industry, which administers Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, notified, and published the Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2024 (“Patent Amendment Rules”) in the Official Gazette of India on 15 March 2024. These amended rules are effective from 15 […]

India- What constitutes ‘therapeutic efficacy’ when determining patentability of ‘new forms of known substances’

The Delhi High Court recently rendered a significant decision clarifying the concept of enhanced therapeutic efficacy, when determining the patentability of new forms of known substances. The case involved an appeal by the patent applicant challenging the rejection of their patent application under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970 (as amended) (the ‘Act’). Section […]

India- Pathbreaking ruling by the High Court- Patentability of an invention relation to foetal genomic analysis from a maternal biological sample

In a recent decision of the High Court of Madras, in the Chinese University of Hong Kong and Sequenom, Inc. (“Appellants”) v. The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs (“Respondent”), CMA (PT) No.14 of 2023, the Court had the opportunity to delve into the nuances of Section 3(i) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 (as amended) (the […]