― Friday, 12th June 2020 Availing Patent Benefits – A ‘Status’ Check!
Every patent office provides certain benefits to Patent Applicants if they meet certain criteria (with respect to entity size, gross income and others). These benefits may be patent fee discounts or speedy examination processes.
This article touches upon the benefits extended by IPO, USPTO and EPO to entities based on their status.
― Wednesday, 27th May 2020 Not an Equal world for AI - No Inventorship for them!
With Artificial intelligence (AI) replacing humans in myriad sectors and operational aspects, it is not surprising that AI is able to concoct its own inventions. AI-generated inventions are (and may become) the norm, however, awarding inventorship to AI under the current patent system is far-fetched. So, is it justifiable denying patent rights to the actual inventor for inventions created by AI or does the patent system merely operate on the fact that AI is a machinewith no capability to exercise legal rights even if given any, and therefore unfit to hold inventorship for its creations.
― Wednesday, 27th May 2020 First Filing in India: A Requirement or a Choice?
Indian resident inventors may decide to file patent applications in multiple countries including India or entirely disregard India and go international! This may be due to weak market strength/poor demand for the product/invention in the country.
As per Indian Patents Act, it is mandatory to obtain an Foreign Filing License (FFL) if an Indian resident inventor decides to first file in a foreign country bypassing Indian Patent Office(IPO) . As per the rules, within 21 days of requesting for an FFL, the IPO, usually, either issues the FFL certificate or rejects the FFL request.
Another option is to first file in India and then wait for a cooling-off period (six weeks!) before attempting to file in a foreign country. In this case, an FFL is not required.
― Friday, 22nd May 2020 The Missing Link - IT Act and IPR Laws
Cyber laws are defined under the Information Technology (IT) Act of 2000 encompassing legal and regulatory aspects of the internet and the world wide web. However, certain entities/intermediaries such as e-commerce websites, search engines, and data aggregators sometimes come under scrutiny for violation of IPR laws when seen under the light of IT Act. Hence, protection to intermediaries from liability, arising out of content posted by users, needs be addressed by creating nexus between IT Act and IPR laws.
― Wednesday, 20th May 2020 Keeping an Eye on India - USA’s IP Priority Watch List
India has been grappling with big IP giants such as the US to establish its stance on the IP front. Owing to a fallible IP regime, India has yet again come under the US’s Priority Watch List and is required to meet certain expectations of the US in terms of trade and other IPR related policies. However, the question still remains whether India, being a sovereign nation, should let itself be subdued by the US or have its own say in IP matters concerning the nation.
― Friday, 26th February 2021 Federal Court Reinstates Decision That REMICADE New Use Patent Is Valid And Infringed
On January 12, 2021, the Federal Court issued its decision on the reconsideration, finding again that Canadian Patent No. 2,261,630 (630 patent) is valid: 2021 FC 42. In broad terms, the 630 patent claims use of the combination of infliximab with methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients whose disease was not controlled by previous MTX treatment alone.
― Friday, 26th February 2021 3M Prevails in Patent Infringement Action Against Qingdao Sisa Abrasives Co., Ltd.
The Intermediate People's Court of Zhengzhou, China has ordered that the BCA-T (Blue Ceramic Abrasive Triangle) abrasive grain made by Qingdao Sisa Abrasives Co., Ltd. infringes 3M's Chinese patents ZL200980155621.4 and ZL201080026268.2. These patents relate to 3M's Precision-Shaped Abrasive Grain technology. The court order requires Sisa to immediately stop the manufacture, sale, and offer for sale of Sisa's infringing abrasive grain in China and directs the company to compensate 3M for its economic losses and expenses for rights of protection. The judgement went into effect on Feb. 1, 2021.
― Thursday, 25th February 2021 Infinity Computer Products, Inc. v. Oki Data Americas, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021)
Infinity Computer Products ("Infinity") sued Oki Data in the District of Delaware for infringement of four patents. The District Court found the patents invalid due to indefiniteness and the Federal Circuit affirmed. This case serves to illustrate two important points in patent law: (i) taking contradictory positions during prosecution will be held against the applicant, and (ii) the Federal Circuit will take said contradictory positions to an unnecessary extreme in order to support a holding of indefiniteness.
― Thursday, 25th February 2021 Apple Sued for Infringement of Biometric Technology Patents via Face ID Feature
On Tuesday, plaintiff CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd. (CPC), “an investment company focused on biometric technology,” filed a complaint against Apple in the Western District of Texas for patent infringement, alleging that Apple infringed the patents-in-suit.
― Thursday, 25th February 2021 Equitable Defense of Intervening Rights
John Bean’s U.S. Patent No. 6,397,622 covers a machine for rapidly chilling “slaughtered, eviscerated poultry carcasses.” The approach uses an auger that moves the carcasses in one direction against a counter-flow of chilled water. In 2014, John Bean sued its primary competitor Morris for patent infringement, and this is the second appeal in the case.