Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J
AB INITIO TECHNOLOGY LLC – Appellant
Versus
The Controller of Patents & Designs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of patent application appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. court's detailed analysis and application of legal principles. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 4. description of how the invention works. (Para 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 5. assessment of novelty and inventive step. (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61) |
| 6. court's final decision on the appeal. (Para 62) |
JUDGMENT
Background:
The appellant assails an order dated July 13, 2020, which rejected its patent application No. 4693/CHENP/2010 dated July 27, 2010 in respect of its claimed invention titled “Graphic Representations of Data Relationship”. The said application was filed as a national phase application of the Patent Co- operation Treaty (PCT) application number PCT/US2009/035293 dated February 26, 2009 claiming priority from US Patent Application no. 61/031,672 dated February 26, 2008.
2. Pursuant to the appellant’s request for examination dated February 20, 2012, the
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
