Category: section 3(i)

Delhi High Court differentiates between a method of treatment and a method of producing a substance used for treatment

by mehtaip, posted in Abhilasha Niroola, Ankush Mehta, Mehta & Mehta, Mehta & Mehta Associates, MehtaIP, Patentability, Patents, section 3(b), section 3(c), section 3(d), section 3(e), section 3(f), section 3(i)

In the matter of Arthrogen GMBH (‘Appellant’) v Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks and Anr (‘Respondents’) [C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 415/2022], the Delhi High Court, vide its order dated 05.02.2024, set aside the Respondents impugned order dated 28th November 2019 and remanded the matter to the Respondents for de novo consideration while restoring the patent application for the subject patent to its original number.

Continue reading “Delhi High Court differentiates between a method of treatment and a method of producing a substance used for treatment” →

Section 3(i) of Indian Patent Act – touching on non-patentability, exceptions & grey areas!

by mehtaip, posted in Abhilasha Niroola, Ankush Mehta, exceptions, Mehta & Mehta, Mehta & Mehta Associates, non-patentability, Patentability, Patents, section 3(i), Section 3(i) of the Indian Patents Act, Uncategorized

Patentability of methods for treatment has been objected under multiple jurisdictions. Similarly, the provision of section 3(i) of the Indian Patent Act, 1970 prohibits grant of Patent to any invention relating to “any process for the medicinal, surgical, curative, prophylactic, diagnostic, therapeutic or other treatment of human beings or any process for a similar treatment of animals to render them free of disease or to increase their economic value or that of their products.” Continue reading “Section 3(i) of Indian Patent Act – touching on non-patentability, exceptions & grey areas!” →