Latest Articles on Indian IP
-
An IP Checklist for Indian Startups & MSMEs
Most IP problems are cheap to prevent and expensive to fix. Here is a practical intellectual property checklist for Indian startups and small businesses.
-
How to Register a Trademark in India: A Step-by-Step Guide
Your brand is an asset worth protecting. Here is the trademark registration process in India, step by step, under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
-
Patent vs. Trademark vs. Copyright: What’s the Difference?
Patents, trademarks, and copyright protect completely different things. Here is a plain-English guide for India, and how to choose the right protection.
-
IP Recordals in India: Assignments, Address Changes & Mergers Explained
When IP changes hands or your company details change, the official register must be updated. Here is how recordals work in India and why they matter.
-
Foreign Filing Licence (FFL) in India: What It Is and When You Need One
If you are resident in India and want to patent an invention abroad, Section 39 of the Patents Act may require a Foreign Filing Licence first. Here is how it works.
-
Patent Renewals in India: Deadlines, Fees & How to Stay Protected
A granted patent only stays in force if you pay annual renewal fees on time. Here is how patent renewals work in India, and how to avoid a costly lapse.
-
When “Efficacy” Left the Pharmacy: Syngenta and Section 3(d) Beyond Medicines
Since Novartis, Section 3(d) ‘efficacy’ meant therapeutic efficacy. In Syngenta v. Controller, the Delhi High Court freed the test from the pharmacy — for an agrochemical, staying stable in the spray tank can be enhancement of efficacy.
-
Better Late Than Never? Post-Filing Efficacy Data Gets a Hearing in Daewoong
A Section 3(d) refusal turned on missing efficacy data, not a missing effect. The Delhi High Court let Daewoong file that data on appeal and sent the case back — a notable counterpoint to the ‘prove it at filing’ orthodoxy.
-
No Surprises at the Finish Line: Section 10(4)(c) Objections Belong at Examination
The Patent Office cannot ambush an applicant with new clarity objections at the refusal stage. In Wirtgen v. Controller, the Delhi High Court set aside a refusal that did exactly that — and reminded everyone that examination is a conversation, not a trap.
-
Examine the Claims That Are Alive: Harvard and the “Glaring Error” of Ignoring Amendments
Harvard amended its claims from a composition to the cells themselves — then the Controller refused on the old claims. The Delhi High Court called ignoring the live claims a ‘glaring error’ and sent it back.