Remove 2005 Remove Confidentiality Remove Patent Remove Patent Application
article thumbnail

Journey Through “Septembers” on SpicyIP (2005 – Present)

SpicyIP

Coming back to NIA, among other things , the NIA Act also became known for its objective to codify and consolidate the law of confidentiality and trade secrets – something for which there is no specific law in India. One pertinent post on this subject was from this month in 2010 called the Patent Eligibility and the Logic of Law and Science.

article thumbnail

Some Concerns about the Amendment Process to Key Patent Levers: A “Captured” Patent Office?

SpicyIP

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.

Patent 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

“Right to Access a Public Record” vs “Right to not Communicate the Work”: Where is Public Interest?”

SpicyIP

In Rajeev Kumar vs Jamia Millia Islamia (12th April 2021), an extremely interesting tussle was seen with the copyright over a thesis being pitted against a person’s right to obtain information under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Examining application of Section 8(1)(d). Assessment. suo moto mandatory disclosures.

article thumbnail

Patentability of Food Recipes and the Section 3(e) Challenge

IIPRD

Recently, the office of Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks granted a patent to a ragi walnut soup mix prepared by the 52-year old woman, Shubhangi Patil. In her patent application, she claimed that her soup is free from preservatives and artificial additives. Introduction. The answer is yes.

Patent 40
article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 26- March 3)

SpicyIP

Controller Gen of Patents: The DHC’s Dilemma of Identifying the Method of Treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patent Act In the context of Section 3(i), the DHC recently clarified that a ‘method of treatment’ is distinct from a ‘method of producing a substance’ that can later be used in the treatment.

article thumbnail

Wisk Aero LLC v. Archer Aviation Inc.: A High Profile Trade Secrets Case Shows the Limits of Circumstantial Evidence

LexBlog IP

It also noted that the public statements of Archer’s senior officers were ambiguous and not necessarily conclusive that confidential information of Wisk Aero’s was brought by and used by its engineers when they joined Archer and developed its air taxi. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit explained in Stratienko v. Cordis Corp.,

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (November 6- November 12)

SpicyIP

Highlights of the Week India Accelerates in the Patent Race: But Is There a Pot of Gold at the End of the Rainbow? Image from here The World IP Indicator 2023 highlights India’s progress in the global patent race. Johnson & Johnson’s “Non-Enforcement” of Bedaquiline Patents: What has Actually been Gained?