Novartis Patent Application Denied

SO
S&A Law Offices

Contributor

S&A Law Offices is a full-service law firm comprising experienced, well-recognized and accomplished professionals. S&A Law Offices aims to provide its clients (both domestic and international) with top-quality counsel and legal insights, which combines the Firm's innovative approach with comprehensive expertise across industries and a broad spectrum of modalities. Being a full-service law firm, we take pride in having the capability of providing impeccable legal solutions across various practice areas and industries and makes an endeavor to provide a 360 degree legal solution. With registered office at Gurugram and other strategically located offices in New Delhi, Mumbai, and Bengaluru, along with associate offices across India, S&A is fully equipped to provide legal services on a pan-India basis.
The Patent office (PO) Delhi in a recent event refused to grant a patent for an application of Novartis.
India Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The Patent office (PO) Delhi in a recent event refused to grant a patent for an application of Novartis. The Swiss Pharmaceutical company applied patent for a modified formulae of its diabetes drug called Vidagliptin which is being marketed under the brand name of Galvus.

Novartis filed an application with the PO in November 2007, The First Examination Report (FER) was issued in end-May 2012, with objections against some of the claims made by the company, for which the company responded in May 2013.The examiner was not satisfied with the response filed by the company and raised some more objection after re-examination. On request of company an official hearing was held in May 2014, Rajesh Dixit assistant controller of Patents and design, Delhi said in his order that the claims failed to meet the requirements under section 2(1)(j) of patent law, which says an invention means a new product or process involving an inventive step and capable of industrial application. The company also failed to meet the requirements of Section 3(d) and 3(e) of the Act, he said. So, a grant of patent was refused.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More