JUDGMENT

AMIT BANSAL, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter ‘Act’) and is directed against the order dated 14th July, 2022 (hereinafter ‘impugned order’) passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs (hereinafter ‘Controller’), whereby the Indian Patent Application No. 201717005699 titled ‘VACCINE FOR LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS’ (hereinafter ‘subject patent application’), which relates to a recombinant Salmonella microorganism based live vaccine for preventing enteric bacterial infection, has been refused.

BRIEF FACTS

2. Brief facts necessary for deciding the present appeal are set out below:

2.1. The appellant, The Regents of the University of California, is an entity based out of the United States of America.

2.2. The subject patent application was filed as a national-phase application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (‘PCT’), claiming priority from a US Patent Application with a priority date of 29th August, 2014. The appellant had filed the subject patent application on 17th February, 2017 with the Indian Patent Office, Delhi. The bibliographic details of the application are given below:

2.3. A request for examination of the said application was filed by the appellant on 31st May, 2018, and the First Examination Report (hereinafter ‘FER’) was issued on 24th March, 2021. The following objections were communicated to the appellant via the said FER:

a. Lack of inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Act;

b. Non patentable under Section 3(c), 3(d), 3(e), 3(i) of the Act;

c. Lack of unity of invention under Section 10(5) of the Act;

d. Insufficient disclosure under Section 10(4) of the Act.

2.4. In reply to the objections raised in the FER, the appellant’s agent submitted a detailed response via letter dated 16th July, 2021.

2.5. Thereafter, a hearing was scheduled for 22nd November, 2021, and the following objections were communicated to the appellant via the hearing notice:

a. Lacks inventive step under Section 2(1)(j) of the Act;

b. Non patentable under Section 3(c), 3(d) and 3(e) of the Act;

c. Broader scope under Section 59(1) of the Act;

d. Lack of sufficiency of disclosure and unity of invention under Section 10(4) and 10(5) of the Act.

2.6. Post hearing, written submissions along with amended claims were filed by the appellant before the Patent Office on 7th December, 2021.

3. The impugned order was passed by the Patent Office on 14th July, 2022, refusing the subject patent application on the ground that the claims of the subject patent application do not fulfil the mandatory requirements under Section 10(4) and 10(5) of the Act and that the subject matter claimed is not eligible for patent protection on account of Section 3(c) of the Act.

4. The impugned order holds that the complete specification of the subject patent application has not sufficiently disclosed the recombinant Salmonella microorganism-based live vaccine as required under Section 10(4) and 10(5) of the Act. Moreover, it also holds that, in light of insufficiency in the disclosure, the claims of the subject patent application are too broad and could also cover naturally mutated Salmonella