SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 12505

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
MAHESH GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS – Respondent


JUDGMENT

SANJEEV NARULA, J.:

1. This judgment addresses the refusal of Indian Patent Application No. 201611041718 for the ‘PORTABLE VEHICLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM’ (‘subject patent application’). The refusal order, issued by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Designs on 27th December, 2018 (‘the impugned order’), asserts that the subject patent does not meet the inventive step requirement as stipulated under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Indian Patent Act, 1970 (‘the Act’). Thus, according to the Controller, the subject patent fails to qualify as an invention under Section 2(1)(j) of the Act.

PROCEEDINGS LEADING TO THE PRESENT APPEAL:

2. The appellant applied for the subject patent on 6th December, 2016 before the Indian Patent Office (‘IPO’). Thereafter, the appellant filed the request for examination dated 1st December, 2017. Consequently, the First Examination Report (‘FER’) dated 21st March, 2018 was issued by the IPO claiming that the subject patent application lacked novelty and inventive step required under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Act. The FER was issued referencing prior art D1: US7103460B1, D2: DE60036650T2, and D3: US20140306817A1. Furthermore, the claims were found to be non- paten

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top