2003 Patent Patent Application Patent Law 
SpicyIP
AUGUST 1, 2021
In the first part of this post, I had covered the Parliamentary Standing Committee’s Report recommendations on amendments to Section 3 of the Patents Act. Flexibility in Procedure or Bending Over Backwards for Higher Patent Filing? The recommendations on making procedural norms of patent filing less stringent are noteworthy.
Intepat
AUGUST 25, 2023
The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry on the 22nd August, 2023 published “The Draft Patents (Amendment), Rules, 2023” (Draft Rules). Patent applications and prosecution thereof is currently governed under the Patents Rules 2003 (2003 Rules).
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
SpicyIP
MARCH 21, 2024
In light of the recent Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024, we are pleased to bring this post by Prashant Reddy T., Image from here A ‘Captured’ Patent Office? Two of the provisions slated to be amended have a direct impact on the quality of patents granted by the Patent Office. Prashant Reddy T.
Patently-O
APRIL 30, 2024
by Dennis Crouch This article explores the impact of Generative AI on prior art and potential revisions to patent examination standards to address the rising tidal wave of AI-generated, often speculative, disclosures that could undermine the patent system’s integrity. See my 2014 post. 102, and are presumed to be enabling.
Patently-O
AUGUST 29, 2022
In Patent Law class today, we started the chapter on “disclosure” that focuses on doctrines of enablement, written description, and best mode as codified in 35 U.S.C. CFMT’s two asserted patents claimed improved apparatus/method for cleaning semiconductor wafers using a specific closed-environment setup.
IP and Legal Filings
MARCH 27, 2024
ABSTRACT The legal dispute between Bajaj and TVS Motors centers around the alleged unauthorized use of the DTSi patent. This case holds significant importance not only due to the financial implications for the involved parties but also due to its implications for the application of the doctrine of pith and marrow. Motor Company Ltd.)
More Than Your Mark
NOVEMBER 30, 2018
Patentability. The position of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on trademarks for cannabis-related goods and services is discussed in my colleague’s blog post, “ Trademark Registration for Cannabis Trademark Owners a Legal Haze.”. In short, a substance’s Schedule I classification is irrelevant to its patentability.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
136 
Let's personalize your content