{"title":"批前反对:CSIR诉Ms Hindustan Lever Limited","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article attempts to provide an overview of the pre-grant opposition against a patent application no 1219/DEL/2004dated 30-06-2004 filed by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The Pre-Grant Opposition was filed byM/s Hindustan Lever Limited by way of Representation u/s 25 (1) of Indian Patents Act, 1970. This resulted in theapplication being denied to CSIR, by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Design, Indian Patent Office (IPO), New Delhi.Subsequently, CSIR went on to file an appeal against the Order of Assistant Controller of Patents & Design at IntellectualProperty Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai which ultimately resulted in the impingement of the decision of the AssistantController of Patents and Designs, IPO, New Delhi by the IPAB on 20-06-2013 and a direction to grant the Patent to CSIRwas passed by IPAB, Chennai, and accordingly the Patent was granted to CSIR on 27-08-2015. This study provides anoverview of the case, including comprehensive information on the Indian patent filing process, examination procedures, pregrantopposition, and strategies to address opposition. Furthermore, it presents a comparative analysis of similar cases,highlighting key legal interpretations, and offers suggestions for enhancing institutional IP due diligence processes andstrengthening IP safeguards.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pre-Grant Opposition: CSIR v Ms Hindustan Lever Limited\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.827\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article attempts to provide an overview of the pre-grant opposition against a patent application no 1219/DEL/2004dated 30-06-2004 filed by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The Pre-Grant Opposition was filed byM/s Hindustan Lever Limited by way of Representation u/s 25 (1) of Indian Patents Act, 1970. This resulted in theapplication being denied to CSIR, by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Design, Indian Patent Office (IPO), New Delhi.Subsequently, CSIR went on to file an appeal against the Order of Assistant Controller of Patents & Design at IntellectualProperty Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai which ultimately resulted in the impingement of the decision of the AssistantController of Patents and Designs, IPO, New Delhi by the IPAB on 20-06-2013 and a direction to grant the Patent to CSIRwas passed by IPAB, Chennai, and accordingly the Patent was granted to CSIR on 27-08-2015. This study provides anoverview of the case, including comprehensive information on the Indian patent filing process, examination procedures, pregrantopposition, and strategies to address opposition. Furthermore, it presents a comparative analysis of similar cases,highlighting key legal interpretations, and offers suggestions for enhancing institutional IP due diligence processes andstrengthening IP safeguards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.827\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.827","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文试图概述对科学与工业研究委员会(CSIR)提交的专利申请1219/DEL/2004(日期为2004年6月30日)的授权前异议。授权前异议由m /s Hindustan Lever Limited以1970年《印度专利法》第25(1)条的方式提出。这导致CSIR的申请被专利助理总监拒绝。印度专利局(IPO),新德里。随后,CSIR继续对专利助理总监的命令提起上诉。金奈知识产权上诉委员会(IPAB)的设计最终导致IPAB于2013年6月20日对新德里IPO专利和设计助理控制器的决定产生影响,并由金奈IPAB通过了向CSIR授予专利的指示,因此该专利于2015年8月27日授予CSIR。本研究概述了该案例,包括有关印度专利申请程序、审查程序、孕期异议和应对异议策略的全面信息。此外,本文还对类似案例进行了比较分析,强调了关键的法律解释,并为加强机构知识产权尽职调查程序和加强知识产权保障提供了建议。
Pre-Grant Opposition: CSIR v Ms Hindustan Lever Limited
The article attempts to provide an overview of the pre-grant opposition against a patent application no 1219/DEL/2004dated 30-06-2004 filed by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The Pre-Grant Opposition was filed byM/s Hindustan Lever Limited by way of Representation u/s 25 (1) of Indian Patents Act, 1970. This resulted in theapplication being denied to CSIR, by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Design, Indian Patent Office (IPO), New Delhi.Subsequently, CSIR went on to file an appeal against the Order of Assistant Controller of Patents & Design at IntellectualProperty Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai which ultimately resulted in the impingement of the decision of the AssistantController of Patents and Designs, IPO, New Delhi by the IPAB on 20-06-2013 and a direction to grant the Patent to CSIRwas passed by IPAB, Chennai, and accordingly the Patent was granted to CSIR on 27-08-2015. This study provides anoverview of the case, including comprehensive information on the Indian patent filing process, examination procedures, pregrantopposition, and strategies to address opposition. Furthermore, it presents a comparative analysis of similar cases,highlighting key legal interpretations, and offers suggestions for enhancing institutional IP due diligence processes andstrengthening IP safeguards.