Novartis challenged the rejection of its patent application for the cancer drug Gleevec in India. The Madras Patent Office rejected the application on the grounds that Gleevec was merely a new salt form of the existing drug imatinib, and did not demonstrate enhanced efficacy as required by Section 3(d) of India's Patents Act. Novartis filed a legal challenge arguing that Section 3(d) violated international trade agreements and India's constitution. The court upheld Section 3(d) as compliant with trade rules and not arbitrary, finding that salt forms with modest improvements did not meet the standard of invention required for patents. The court also found it had jurisdiction to review compliance of domestic laws with international treaties.
Intellectual property litigations: A case study of Anticancer drug Glivec in ...Dr Shahid Saache
This presentation include brief about various intellectual property rights in India like patent, copyright, trademarks etc. It also include a detailed case discussion of Novartis anticancer drug Glivec i.e imatinib mesylate which is a patent case.
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in IndiaVijay Dalmia
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in India - See the presentation to understand the nuances of enforcement of IPR ( Trade Mark, Copyright, Patents, Designs etc.) by civil and criminal remedies in India.
compulsory licensing of patents in India how to get compulsory licensing in India, procedure, rights involved, act and sections,limitation of compulsory licensing, government rights for compulsory licensing,well good for law students
Intellectual property litigations: A case study of Anticancer drug Glivec in ...Dr Shahid Saache
This presentation include brief about various intellectual property rights in India like patent, copyright, trademarks etc. It also include a detailed case discussion of Novartis anticancer drug Glivec i.e imatinib mesylate which is a patent case.
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in IndiaVijay Dalmia
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in India - See the presentation to understand the nuances of enforcement of IPR ( Trade Mark, Copyright, Patents, Designs etc.) by civil and criminal remedies in India.
compulsory licensing of patents in India how to get compulsory licensing in India, procedure, rights involved, act and sections,limitation of compulsory licensing, government rights for compulsory licensing,well good for law students
A detail discussion on Trademark law in India and landmark cases relating to trademark infringement, passing off action and remedies thereof have been discussed in this ppt. Illustrations have been provided wherever necessary for more understanding.
Procedure For Registration Of Trademark In IndiaStartupwala
Procedure for Registration of Trademark in India, How to register trademark in India Guide, Brand and logo protection in India, registration of logo in India, How to apply for your TRADEMARK in India, Why to file Trademark, benefits of trademark application.
NEWS FLASH: //Check our latest course offering on Patent-Business-Strategy over at Udemy here: http://www.udemy.com/patent-business-strategy/ with a 50 per cent launch discount //
This a discussion on patent infringement for academic purpose. Please do NOT consider this legal advice.
[Some material has not been updated for recent changes, so use it at your own risk]
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice.
Under the Indian patent law, a patent can be obtained only for an invention that is new and useful. The invention must relate to the machine, article, or substance produced by a manufacturer, or the process of manufacture of an article.
Copyright: Law of Copyrights and Infringement / A Presentation at NALSAR Hyde...BananaIP Counsels
Copyright: Law of Copyrights and Infringement / A Presentation at NALSAR Hyderabad
Contact Us for Intellectual Property Services
BananaIP Counsels
Regd Office
No.40,3rd Main Road,JC Industrial Estate,
Kanakapura Road,Bangalore – 560 062.
Email: contact@bananaip.com
Telephone: +91-80-26860414 /24/34
A detail discussion on Trademark law in India and landmark cases relating to trademark infringement, passing off action and remedies thereof have been discussed in this ppt. Illustrations have been provided wherever necessary for more understanding.
Procedure For Registration Of Trademark In IndiaStartupwala
Procedure for Registration of Trademark in India, How to register trademark in India Guide, Brand and logo protection in India, registration of logo in India, How to apply for your TRADEMARK in India, Why to file Trademark, benefits of trademark application.
NEWS FLASH: //Check our latest course offering on Patent-Business-Strategy over at Udemy here: http://www.udemy.com/patent-business-strategy/ with a 50 per cent launch discount //
This a discussion on patent infringement for academic purpose. Please do NOT consider this legal advice.
[Some material has not been updated for recent changes, so use it at your own risk]
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice.
Under the Indian patent law, a patent can be obtained only for an invention that is new and useful. The invention must relate to the machine, article, or substance produced by a manufacturer, or the process of manufacture of an article.
Copyright: Law of Copyrights and Infringement / A Presentation at NALSAR Hyde...BananaIP Counsels
Copyright: Law of Copyrights and Infringement / A Presentation at NALSAR Hyderabad
Contact Us for Intellectual Property Services
BananaIP Counsels
Regd Office
No.40,3rd Main Road,JC Industrial Estate,
Kanakapura Road,Bangalore – 560 062.
Email: contact@bananaip.com
Telephone: +91-80-26860414 /24/34
The presentation herein, on patent infringement analysis, is delivered by Dr. Kalyan Kankanala at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore, for Senior officials of the Ministry of MSME, Government of India. Starting with patent rights and claim construction, the presentation covers all aspects of patent infringement such as literal infringement and infringement by equivalence with the help of Indian cases and examples. For more information about the presentation or the event itself, please contact the Sinapse team at sinapse@bananaip.com.
Contact Us for Intellectual Property Services
BananaIP Counsels
Regd Office
No.40,3rd Main Road,JC Industrial Estate,
Kanakapura Road,Bangalore – 560 062.
Email: contact@bananaip.com
Telephone: +91-80-26860414 /24/34
India is no newcomer to patent protection. The discussion on having a law to protect inventions goes back as far as 1832. After a number of failed attempts, the first Patents Act of India, essentially a copy of British patent law, was finally enacted in 1856. A series of adaptations followed, again modeled on changes in British law.
Latest patent examination guidelines for pharmaceutical based inventions published by Indian Patent Office on 29th October, 2014. The patent examination guidelines cover the following points:
1. Patent Claims Of Pharmaceutical Inventions which includes Markush claims
2. Comprehensive patent search strategy for conducting prior art search by the Patent Examiner
3. Definition of "invention" under section 2(1)(j) of the Indian Patent Act
4. Assessment of Novelty aspect of the invention
5. Assessment of Inventive Step
6. Industrial applicability of the technology
7. Subject matter of Inventions which are not patentable
8. Sufficiency of description, clarity and support of the patent claims in the specification
9. Unity of invention
Comprehensive patent search strategy will include combining various search parameters including key words, IPC, compound searches, etc. and thorough search will be carried out in patent as well as non-patent databases.
Pharmaceutical Compounds can be searched and identified from the various databases by using several methods:
a) Molecular formula and structural formula searching;
b) Name searching using IUPAC nomenclature;
c) Compound searching using CAS Registry Numbers;
d) Generic name searching (INN); and
e) Search using International Patent Classification (IPC)
Sufficiency of disclosure in the patent application with respect to biological material and deposits:
If the invention relates to a biological material which is not possible to be described in a sufficient manner and which is not available to the public, the application shall be completed by depositing the material to an International Depository Authority (IDA) under the Budapest Treaty. The deposit of the material shall be made not later than the date of filing of the application in India and a reference of the deposit shall be given in the specification within three months from the date of filing of the patent application in India. All the available characteristics of the material required for it to be correctly identified or indicated are to be included in the specification including the name, address of the depository institute and the date and number of the deposit.
Disclaimer:
This post is no way related to Indian Patent office (IPO) or any of its subsidiaries. All the posts/comments are only for general information or use and it should not be relied on as official notice. Every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of information furnished in this post, authors do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct or indirect use of the contents provided on this post. We can be reached at info [at] techcorplegal [dot] com
Examination Of Patent Applications In The Field Of Pharmaceuticals Patents| Draft Guidelines For Examination Of Patent Applications In The Field Of Pharmaceuticals issued by Indian Patent Office
Draft Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications in the Field of Pharmaceuticals are made available to the public by the Indian Patent Office. The said guidelines are intended to bring in uniform practice for the examination of applications related to relevant pharmaceutical subject matter.
Compulsory Licensing: Regulatory perspective on how it can be filed and how they can be used for public health, especially essential anti-cancer molecules. A tool to scale down the cost of essential life saving medicines
1. CASE ANALYSIS
Assignment No. 3 Patent Law1
Name of the Case
: - Novartis A.G. v/s Union of India
Citation
:- (2007) 4 MLJ 1153
Date of Judgement
: - 6 August, 2007
Names of the Judge/s
: -R. Balasubramanian, J. and PrabhaSridevan J.
Provisions Involved
:-
Article 14 of the Constitution of India
Article 27 and Article 64of the TRIPS Agreement
Section 3 (d) of the Patents Act of 1970
Brief Fact
:-In 1993, Novartis filed patents worldwide for the active molecule imatinib. Novartisdid not patent
“
imatinib
”
in India because the 1970Act did not allow patenting of pharmaceutical products at that time. Af
ter India’s entry into the WTO in 1995, Novartis fileda “mailbox” patent application
in the Madras Patent Office for imatinib mesylate, a betacrystalline form of the free base imatinib. In
2002, Novartis started its Gleevec donation program in India to provide Gleevec to patients who were
unable to afford the medicine, buthalted that program after Indian drug manufacturers began to
produce a generic version of Gleevec. In2003, the Patent Office granted Novartis Exclusive Marketing
Rights (EMR) inIndia, which allowed Novartis to enjoin generic Gleevec manufacturers and raise the
price of Gleevec almost ten-fold.In January 2006, the Madras Patent Office refused to grant Novartis a
patent for imatinib mesylate. The first major ground for rejection was that because imatinib
mesylatewas a salt form of the free base imatinib, and Novartis claimed all pharmaceutical salt formsof
imatinib in its1993 patents, the Indian application therefore lacked novelty and inventive-ness.
ThesecondmajorgroundforrejectionwasbasedonSection3(d) of the 2005 Amendment,which required
that new forms of a known substance could only be patented as a product if they demon
strated “enhanced efficacy.”
Although Novartis disclosed information thatimatinib mesylate had a 30% increase in bioavailability (the
percentage of the drug absorbedinto the bloodstream) as compared with imatinib, the Patent Office
found this insufficient to
meet the “enhanced efficacy” requireme
nt of Section 3(d).
In May 2006, Novartis filed two writ petitions before the Madras High Court under Article 226 of the
Indian Constitutionto declare that section 3(d) of thePatents Act,
1970 assubstituted by the Patents (Amendment)Act, 2005 is non-
2. complaint with theTRIPSAgreement and / or is unconstitutional being vague, arbitrary and violative of Ar
ticle 14 of the Constitution ofIndia and consequentially to direct the Controller General of Patents &
Designstoallow the Patent Application. The respondents to the suit were the IndianGovernment, the
Patent Office, several Indian generic drug manufacturers and an
Indian public interest group. The Indian generic drug manufacturers were Natco Pharma, Cipla,Hetro
Drugs, Ranbaxy, Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance and SunPharmaceuticals. The
Indian public Interest group was Cancer Patient Aid Association. The case was bifurcated betweenthe
Madras High Court and the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). The challengeson TRIPS
compliance and constitutionality of Section 3(d) were heard by the Madras HighCourt.
Issues
:-
Whether courts in India have jurisdiction to review if Section 3(d) of the 2005Amendment is compliant
with Article 27 of TRIPS, and alternatively, whether courtsin India can grant declaratory relief that
Section 3(d) is not compliant with TRIPS andtherefore violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
If the courts do have jurisdiction, whether Section3(d) complies with Article 27 of TRIPS.
Whether Section 3(d) violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India because it isvague, arbitrary and
confers uncontrolled discretion to the Patent Controller.
Arguments
: -
Whether courts in India have jurisdiction to review if Section 3(d) of the 2005 Amendment is compliant
with Article 27 of TRIPS andalternatively, whether courts in India can grant declaratory relief that
3.
4.
Whether Section 3(d) violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India because it isvague, arbitrary and
confers uncontrolled discretion to the Patent Controller.
Arguments
: -
Whether courts in India have jurisdiction to review if Section 3(d) of the 2005 Amendment is compliant
with Article 27 of TRIPS andalternatively, whether courts in India can grant declaratory relief that