Back
AMIT BANSAL
Impact Selector International LLC – Appellant
Versus
Controller Of Patents – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[Amit Bansal, J.]
1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 117-A of the Patents Act, 1970 impugning the order dated 12th July, 2017 passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs in the Indian Patent Application No. 2366/DELNP/2006 (hereinafter “subject application”) filed on 28th April, 2006 for the invention titled “Field Adjustable Impact JAR” (hereinafter “subject invention”).
2. Brief facts relevant to decide the present appeal are as follows:
2.1 The appellant had filed the subject application on 28th April, 2006 at the Patent Office, New Delhi as a national phase application under Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) claiming priority from US Application No.10/696,823 dated 30th October, 2003.
2.2 After much delay, the Patent Office examined the subject application and issued a First Examination Report (FER) on 12th February, 2014, in which 9 objections were raised on behalf of the Patent Office. The main objection pertained to lack of inventive steps in terms of Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, 1970.
2.3 A detailed response was filed on behalf of the appellant to the aforesaid FER on 14th October, 2014, wherein the appellant distinguished the su
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a detailed analysis of the existing knowledge and how the subject invention lacks inventiveness in light of the prior art when ....
The Controller must provide proper reasoning for rejecting a patent application and consider the applicant's submissions, failing which violates the principles of natural justice.
The duty of the ld. Asst. Controller to consider the objections and pass a reasoned order, and the purpose of Rule 28(7) of the Patent Rules, 2003 in capturing the submissions made during the course ....
The judgment emphasizes the requirement for a reasoned decision and scrupulous adherence to principles of natural justice while rejecting patent applications, highlighting the elements of inventive s....
Passing of a reasoned and a speaking order is an integral part of the principle of audi alteram partem. The Controller must consider the existing knowledge and how a person skilled in the art would m....
The impugned order lacked proper discussion of novelty and inventive step objections under Section 2 of the Patents Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
