Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Page 8 of about 66,121 results (0.015 seconds)

Aug 07 2009 (HC)

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. Vs. Wyeth Limited

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 162(2009)DLT298; 2009(41)PTC24(Del)

..... designs. section 22(1) clearly stipulates that where a design has been registered under the act, they shall be open to inspection at the patent office, the representation or specimen of the design and any evidence filed in support of the applicant's contention that the appearance of an article, ..... perhaps in other countries is somewhat different. the registered designs act, 1949, as applicable in the uk and as amended by the copyright, designs and patents act, 1988, speaks of registrable designs and proceedings for registration. however, section 5 of the said registered designs act, 1949 makes provision for secrecy ..... access to a registered design, it would be necessary to point out that section 10 requires that a register of designs be kept at the patent office. section 17 of the said act provides for inspection of registered designs. it stipulates that during the existence of a copyright in a ..... lall referred to the decision of a learned single judge of the calcutta high court in the case of gopal glass works ltd v. assistant controller of patents and designs : 2006 (33) ptc 434 (cal).15. mr lall submitted that the expression .publication. has not been defined in the said act ..... thereof. according to the defendant, the impugned design registration no. 193988 had been obtained by the plaintiff by playing a fraud on the controller of patents and designs and was liable to be cancelled because:- (i) there exists an earlier design registration no. 2055969 in the name of reckitt benckiser .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 08 2011 (HC)

Schering-plough Ltd. Vs. Intellectual Property Appellate Board and anr ...

Court : Chennai

..... contains no reasons. apart from this, the affidavit says that they have a good case on merits and the delay was beyond their control. the patents act, 1970 gives the aggrieved party three months to file the appeal. the communication systems of today are so swift that we do not think any ..... of the act was also submitted. finally, on 05.01.2009 the 2nd respondent passed the final order under section 15 of the act refusing patent on the ground that none of the claim was novel or inventive. in the said order the 2nd respondent went beyond the objections already raised in ..... fer on 08.08.08 claiming objections 1 to 11 raised in the fer as incorrect and it also carried out some minor amendments to the patent application. thereafter, the 2nd respondent examined the amended specification under section 13(3) of the act and issued his examination report on 07.10.2008 ..... /ipab and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider on merits the appeal filed against the order of the 2nd respondent dated 05.01.2009 in patent application no.2376/chenp/2006. 2. it is stated that the petitioner is a swiss pharmaceutical company having huge investments in research and development (r ..... day, the petitioner-company made a request for examination under form-18 in accordance with section 11-b of the patents act, 1970 (for short act). after the examination of the petitioners application for patent the first examination report (fer) was issued on 08.10.2007 asking the petitioner to clarify the objections raised .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1986 (SC)

Monsanto Company by their Patent Agent, De Penning and De Penning Vs. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1986SC712; 1986(2)ARBLR19(SC); (1986)3CompLJ66(SC); 1986(1)SCALE74; (1986)1SCC642; [1986]1SCR120; 1986(1)LC304(SC)

..... as a company in india. it was stated in the plaint that the first plaintiff was the patentee of inventions entitled 'phytotoxic compositions' and 'grass selective herbicide compositions', duly patented under patent number 104120 dated march 1, 1966 and 125381 dated february 20, 1970. the claims and the particulars relating to the inventions were stated to be contained in the specifications of ..... as contained in this marked as m.o.nos. 2 and 3. the plaintiffs also asked for an account etc. annexed to the plaint were the two specifications relating to patent numbers 104120 and 125381. in the specification relating to 'phytotoxic composition' (specification no. 104120), it was claimed : we claim :1. a phytotoxic composition comprising as an active ingredient a ..... the legend on the tins containing the substance manufactured by the defendants showed that what was sold by the defendants was nothing but a reproduction of the first plaintiff's patented formulations. the formulations of the defendant were sent to shri ram institute for analysis and they were said to contain the chemical 'butachlor chemical formula for which is 2 ..... so much the plaintiffs said, and this is very important, 'the active ingredient mentioned in the claim is called 'butachlor'. it suggested, without expressly saying it that the plaintiffs' patents covered butachlor also which in fact it did not, as we shall presently see. it was next stated that the first plaintiff had permitted the second plaintiff to work the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 2001 (HC)

Rajeev Indravadan Modi and ors. Vs. Instance Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. an ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2001)3GLR2010

..... arise. on the contrary, if the argument advanced is accepted, it would, ultimately, result into a situation where the provision granting jurisdiction to the district court for trying patent infringement suits would become redundant. it may also be noted that, at this stage, the defendants have only expressed their intention of making counter-claim and possibility of their ..... separately but in the written statement. admittedly, no written statement is filed. therefore, the contention regarding the transfer of suit under the proviso to section 104 of the patents act under which the application was tendered before trial court cannot be accepted. the proviso specifically provides that where a counter-claim for revocation is made by the defendants, ..... petition challenging the validity before appropriate forum and till that is filed and decided by the competent authority, this hon'ble court is required to consider the validity of a patent in favourof the plaintiffs, and therefore, injunction application is required to be allowed by this honourable court.' 11.1 in paragraph 10 of the affidavit-in-rejoinder, it ..... revisioners, who are the original plaintiffs in civil suit no. 11 of 2000 pending in district court, at vadodara. that suit is preferred by the plaintiffs alleging infringement of registered patent no. 183097 dated march 19, 1998, possessed by the plaintiffs by the defendants. in that suit, application for interim injunction was tendered and the learned assistant judge, vadodara, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2010 (HC)

Neon Laboratories Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Troikaa Pharma Limited, and ors.

Court : Mumbai

..... cannot be established against the present patent application."47 the controller does not observe in the order that the petitioners' objections to the amended specifications raise nothing new and are a repetition of the ..... as cyclodextrins, etc.. thus in no way the citations quoted by the opponent destroy the novelty or the inventive step of the invention disclosed in the present patent application.after going through the written statement of theopponent, reply statement of applicant and amendments carried out by the applicant i find that the ground of opposition ..... salts (7.5% to 10%) that is capable of being administered by intradeltoid route, over and above the intragluteal and slow intravenous route. the present patent application contemplates injectable preparation incorporating 75100 mg of watersoluble salts of diclofenac with the solvent system of at least two or more co solvents/solubilisers selected from differing ..... under:given the importance of the issues, the government undertook broadbased and extensive consultations involving different interest groups on aspects critical to the changes which were necessary in the patents act, 1970. these included countrywide interactive sessions with various interest groups, including scientists, academicians, economists, representatives of various industry sectors (such as pharmaceutical, biotech, and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 2005 (HC)

Wockhardt Limited Vs. Hetero Drugs Limited,

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2006)1MLJ542; 2006(32)PTC65(Mad)

..... material to show that the manufacturing and marketing the product impugned under licence is only by adopting us patent and japan patent, and (ii) the patent documents, containing 10 preparation examples, would not show the cream product. as such, the conclusion, arrived at by the learned single judge, was not on the ..... view, has committed another error, in concluding that the first respondent company is manufacturing and marketing the product under the trade mark nadiderm, only on the basis of us patent and japan patent and not on the basis of admixture composition of the appellant. this conclusion, in our opinion, is also wrong for two reasons, namely, (i) there is no ..... by the drugs controller general for nadiderm to the first respondent was not on the basis of the admixture composition of the appellant, but was only by adopting us patent and japan patent; that though a challenge to the manufacturing licence at the instance of the appellant has been made before the delhi high court in the writ petition, the appellant ..... . this emr certificate confers an exclusive right on the appellant to sell and distribute in india the pharmaceutical composition, containing benzoquinoliziness, namely, nadifloxacin 1% cream under the provisions of the patents act, 1970.(v) in the meantime, hetero drugs limited, first respondent herein, applied to the drugs controller general of india, for manufacturing licence, to manufacture nadifloxacin 1% cream, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1996 (HC)

Hindusthan Lever Limited Vs. Godrej Soaps Limited and Others

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1996Cal367,(1997)1CALLT123(HC),100CWN562

..... absolute the former rule of practice as respects interlocutory injunctions in action for infringement actions. in my view the grant of interlocutory injunctions in actions for infringement of patents is governed by the same principles as in other actions .....,' 27. mr. chakraborty, learned counsel has submitted that in view of the above decision of the house ..... has been also stated that in the objection, alteration has been drawn to the fact that the analysis report mentioned 'water insoluble' and 'alcohol insoluble' whereas the patent is for 'water insoluble particulate structurant'. it is well known that the bis method for ascertaining water/alcohol insoluble particulate structurant is normally through the route of alcohol and ..... the petitioner. 9. hence the prayers for temporary injunction as follows:-- '(a) an order of injunction restraining the respondents, their servants, agents etc. from in any way infringing the patent no. 170131 of the petitioner; (b) a temporary injunction restraining therespondents, their servants, agents eic, from manufacturing, selling etc., the impugned bathing bar vigil with the words ' ..... throughout the country including calcutta through almost all retail outlets and the respondents have taken wrongful advantage of the publication of the invention of the petitioner under patent no. 170171 and patent application no. 274/ bom/88 in the official gazette notified for opposition purposes. on examination of the wrappers of the aforesaid samples of the toilet .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 1962 (HC)

Laxmi Dutt Roop Chand Vs. Nankau and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1964All27

..... at. if the patentee claims protection for a process for producing a result and that result cannot be produced by the process ...... considerationfor the patent fails' and the protection which is purchased by the promise of results cannot survive. it has already been shown earlier that some of the ..... the defendants have not completely copied out or imitated the plaintiff's process of manufacture and one essential part of it, which according to the patent itself reduces the time in the manufacture of utensils, is missing from the defendants' process of manufacture.the statement of nankau defendant that he ..... defendants came to their shop and learnt theprocess of manufacture on the pretext of getting a licence and then stealthily adopted that process infringing the patent right. the defendants' case, on the other hand, is that utensils with the aid of darjas which have been signed by the vakil commissioner ..... 2 only, defendant no. 3 has not put in appearance in this case. the contesting defendants have denied the allegations relating to the alleged patent obtained by mahabir prasad vishwakarma or its transfer in the plaintiff's favour or the registration of assignment. it has been alleged that the suit ..... devi in mirzapur city. luxmi dutt and roop chand are the two partners of the firm at present. one mahabir prasad vishwakarma of mirzapur obtained a patent no. 42514 of 1950 under the act in respect of the process of manufacture of hollow wares, such as 'lotas', 'batwas', 'degchis', 'batlois .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 19 2007 (HC)

Fdc Limited and ors. Vs. Sanjeev Khandelwal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : LC2007(3)139; 2007(35)PTC436(Mad)

..... for exploitation to cripple business rivals without adducing any proof of their alleged infringement. it is specifically and vehemently denied that the revision petitioners are infringing the plaintiffs patented process in order to manufacture their products. 27. it is also denied by the revision petitioners that the non existence of a combined dose of the four ingredients ..... inventions are worked in india on a commercial scale and to the fullest extent that is reasonably practicable without undue delay; and that the protection and enforcement of patent rights contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and ..... decisions relied upon by the revision petitioners are made in the context of article 226 of the constitution of india. further the plaintiffs on earlier occasions filed their patent and trade mark infringement suits against other pharmaceutical companies in other parts of the countries as well for similar relief and obtained decrees as well. so it is ..... the file of the learned principal district judge, thiruvallur against the revision petitioners and others seeking for the relief of permanent injunction, particularly restraining them from infringing the respondents registered patent no. 197822 and trade mark cefi-xl. pending disposal of the main suits, the respondents filed interlocutory applications in i.a. nos. 141, 144, 147, 150, 153, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2008 (HC)

Garware-wall Ropes Ltd. Vs. Techfab India and 5 ors.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : LC2008(3)192

..... connection with, any such examination or investigation or any report or other proceedings consequent thereon. therefore, the legislators have very clearly and unambiguously stated that grant of a patent does not warrant any validity and, therefore, a separate provision has been provided in section 113(1) authorizing the high court in such proceedings as the present matter to ..... the gabion is fairly well established with numerous manufacturing productions, design, methodology and guidance for the gabion products.23. mr. nanavati has further submitted that rope can not be patented by any one because it is available in various forms and it varies in its strength, dimension, density, thickness, abrasion resistance, thermal stability etc. all these details are ..... more flexibility, non-corrosive, having more strength and capable to take the contour of the ground level. he has, therefore, submitted that mere challenging the validity of the patent is not sufficient for not granting of injunction. the respondent has to establish a strong case of invalidity. the respondent has failed to produce any material for establishing prior ..... 26.10.2005 and while vacating the ad-interim injunction, the learned single judge has observed that in case the respondents feel that impugned gabions are different than the patented srg invention of the appellant, the respondents were free to manufacture and sell the impugned gabions. the learned single judge has, however, directed the respondents to maintain .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //