Category Archives: Int’l Practice and Policy

Review of Indian Working Requirements

This newsletter (attached below) from a leading Indian firm, contains a good review of the perils of the working requirement in India. It also provides a good summary of three recent decisions holding pharma patents invalid for obviousness. What is striking is … Continue reading

Posted in Int'l Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NOVARTIS A.G. v. UOI – What is Novelty in Indian Courts?

Can everything old be made new again?  Lots has been written about the Indian Supreme Court rejecting a patent application claiming a crystal modification of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec), which is used to treat CML.  Novartis’ attempt to “evergreen” Gleevec with … Continue reading

Posted in Int'l Practice and Policy, Obviousness | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Deposit of Biological Material – Impact on Validity of Priority Claim

Please find linked below a guest post from Dr. Stefan Danner dealing with a new decision of the EPO Technical Boards of Appeal concerning the deposit of biological material. Biotech IP Newsletter  

Posted in Int'l Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Global Dossier” May Lead to IP5 “One Portal” Filings

As reported in Director Kappos’ blog, progress is being made in harmonizing the patent filing process in the IP5 countries. This may be as big an advance in patent law as the EPO – including our hope for a single … Continue reading

Posted in Int'l Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment