Patent filing requirements in india

Author: Sudhir Kumar

To minimize the cost of Patent filing and prosecution in India, there are number of things an attorney should take in to account.

In the event you are filing a PCT national phase application, provide your associate in India following information:

(i) Application details including title of the invention, names, addresses and Nationality of the inventors; applicants.

(ii) Complete specification as filed before the International office with claims, drawings and abstract.

(iii) English translation of the International Application if filed and published in language other than English.

(iv) Certified copy of the priority document/s if Form PCT/IB/304 is not available

(v) English translation of the priority documents, if filed and published in language other than English

Priority documents are to be filed in India within 31 months from date of priority, therefore if Form PCT/IB/304 is not available, provide your associate the certified copy of priority documents along with your instruction, so that all documentation can be completed on time.

Where the International application or the priority application are in language other than English, provide an English translation of the same to your associate.

Demand from your associate that power of authority as well as other formal documents be sent to you for execution.

The following requirements can be complied within 6 months from date of filing of the application, if your associate charges for late submission of documents these documents/information can be supplied along with the instructions to file the application.

- Where the Applicant is not the inventor, provide your associate with the Assignment deed or any other document by which the inventor/s have assigned their rights to the Applicant.

- Details and status of corresponding Applications in other countries for the same or substantially the same invention.

It will not only save the filing cost but also will minimize your prosecution cost as you would not be required to file petitions along with official fee for not complying with the formal requirements on time and seeking extension of time.

In India, the Patent rights accrues from the date of publication of application in India, it is therefore advisable to ensure speedy publication of the application. Ordinarily in case of the PCT national phase applications the statutory period of waiting till publication i.e. 18 months is already over, therefore the associate should be advised to expedite the publication by chasing the concerned authorities.

A Patent application in India is not examined unless a request for Examination is filed within 48 months from the date of priority. The ordinary time frame from filing of request to issuance of examination report is 18-24 months therefore it is also advisable to file the request for examination as soon as possible (not to wait for 48 months deadline) to expedite the grant in India.

The time frame for putting the application in order of Grant is 12 months from date of issuance of the examination report, but it is advisable to file the response and initiate the discussion with the examiner as soon as possible to avoid any last minute hassles.

Under the Draft Rules Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2010 following Rules are proposed to be introduced, therefore the descriptions as well as claims shall be provided in a supporting format:

1. All Documents must be filed electronically duly authenticated by Applicant or Agent.

2. Filing of documents except drawings and affidavits:

(i) Typewritten or printed in Hindi or English (unless directed or allowed by Controller) in large and legible characters not less than 0.28 cm in height and 1.5 spacing in between lines

(ii) A-4 paper with margin of 4 cm on top and left side and 3 cm on right and bottom.

(iii) Numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals at centre of bottom of sheet;

(iv) Numbering every fifth line of each page of description and claims at right half of the left margin;

(v) Signature other than in English and Hindi to be accompanied by a transliteration in English or Hindi capital letters;

3. In case of sequence listing of nucleotides or amino acids sequences, same must be filed in computer readable form (ASCII text file) along with fee (not applicable earlier)

4. here online transmission cannot be initiated or could not be completed for whatever reasons, document can be handed over or send by post to Patent office within the stipulated time frame.

5. Amended as well as superseded documents to be submitted electronically. Every new or amended document be marked at Header of documents as Amended along with undertaking that unamended pages are the same as originally submitted.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/patents-articles/patent-filing-requirements-in-india-973970.html

About the Author

Author is an Advocate and Patent and Trademark Attorney with Aswal Associates, Attorneys at law & Intellectual property, New Delhi, India and can be reached at sudhir@aswal.com. Author is a member of APAA, Delhi Bar Council, Delhi High Court Bar Association and Supreme Court Bar Association.

Defenses to Patent Infringement

Author: Nick Johnson

Patent law is one of the most specialized branches of the law.



If you have been named in a patent infringement case or believe that you may have a case to pursue compensation and relief for patent infringement on a patent that you hold, a firm of experienced patent infringement lawyers is your best resource for information.



There are, however, a few principles of patent infringement litigation that are helpful to know. Among the most helpful to understand in building your case are the defenses to patent infringement that are most often used in patent infringement cases. The two basic defenses to a patent infringement lawsuit are non-infringement and invalid patent.



Non-infringement defense to patent infringement lawsuits:



In the first, the defendant tries to prove that their product or process does not infringe upon the existing valid patent for one or more reasons. It is usually the first line of defense to be considered. There is an infringement upon a patent when each "claim" in the patent is matched by an element of the infringing product. If the item that is claimed to be infringing does not match each of the claims in the patent, the case may be dismissed because no infringement exists.



In order to prove whether a device or process infringes upon the named patent, the judge or other examiner will first do a careful reading of the claims of the patent. Suppose the patent is for a device that has the purpose of extending the waistband of a skirt by means of an extension of fabric that is fitted with a buttonhole on one end of the extension and a button on the other.



A second company produces a product which consists of a fabric extension that has a buttonhole on one end, and three buttons at various points on the extension so that it can be adjusted to fit the waistband more accurately. The examiner must examine each of the "claims" made in the patent and then match them to the elements of the device in question. In this case, the examiner may find that patent infringement does exist because each of the claims in the patent is matched to an element in the infringing device, which is actually a modification of the patented process.



Invalid patent defense to patent infringement lawsuits

The other most common tack in patent infringement lawsuits is an attempt to invalidate the patent on one or more grounds. In order for there to be a judgment of infringement, their must exist a valid patent; it must be in force at the time of the alleged infringement; and it must meet all the conditions for obtaining a valid patent.



While one might assume that the very issuance of a patent would substantiate its validity, that's often not the case. There are a number of things that might invalidate an existing patent.



1. A prior art or novelty search may turn up descriptions or depictions of the patented application that existed before the date of invention. In this case, the patent may be invalidated because the application or item was not the first depiction of the device. The description or depiction must give enough detail that a person of "reasonable skill" could make or work the device based on that description.



2. The defense may hold that the patent is for a use or device that would have been obvious to anyone with reasonable knowledge or skill. If obviousness can be proved, then the patent may be invalidated and no infringement can have taken place.



3. The defense may charge that the patent holder did not exercise diligence in pursuing the patent application process. Most often, this charge will be brought if the patent's original application was outside the grace period allowed after publication of the patented idea or device.



4. The defense may argue that the subject of the patent is not a suitable subject for patenting.



Those are the most commonly claimed grounds to invalidate a patent in patent infringement cases, but there are many other grounds which could be used to defend against a charge of patent infringement.



In addition, the interpretation of patent law and the definitions of the elements of patent law frequently undergo changes during the course of court cases. As the number of patent infringement cases continues to mount, new defenses are being tried and old ones struck down.



If you are involved in a patent infringement lawsuit or are considering one yourself, it's important to have an experienced professional on your side.



Consult a law firm that specializes in patent infringement cases to get a thoughtful and realistic evaluation of your chances.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/patents-articles/defenses-to-patent-infringement-364421.html

About the Author

Nick Johnson, lead counsel and founding partner of Johnson Law Group, represents individuals or companies with cases involving patent infringement. Call 1-888-311-5522 today or visit http://www.johnsonlawgroup.com for a free case evaluation.

The Immediate Effects of Ratification of the Patent Reform Act of 2011

Author: Andre

Despite President Obama's commitment to make innovation a serious priority in the US, and despite his penchant for ensuring the long-term competitiveness of America, the President is supportive of legislation that will seriously hinder innovation and R&D in America. This bill is the Patent Reform Act of 2011.

The proposed legislation will have the opposite effect than the one intended by its supporters, as unfortunately, the Act will send jobs overseas while it defers innovation. The following are examples of the problems with the current proposal:

New fees will be collected, but all of them will not be used by the Patent Office! Last year the U.S. Patent and Trademark office collected over $50 million in fees in excess of the agency's 2010 authorized budget. However, the USPTO could not use these extra fees as the office only could spend its authorized budget (as set by Congress). The funds over and above the agency's spending limit went elsewhere and were used by the Treasury for other projects. This practice taxes innovation and uses the proceeds to pay for other governmental functions.

The United States has always used a "first-to-invent" system, where a patent naturally goes to the first person who actually invents a product. If two separate parties file for the same invention, the party who actually invents it first will get the patent. In other countries, a "first-to-file" method is used. This causes would-be inventors to rush to patent offices with poorly devised applications, merely so that they could be first. The American "first-to-invent" system is rooted in the US Constitution, and the Patent reform Act of 2011 would drastically alter it.

The Act also includes provisions that can devalue patents by designating judges as gatekeepers. Under the Act, judges would be required to prevent juries from punishing a patent infringer with large judgments.

The proposed Patent Act of 2011 also attempts to make it more difficult for legitimate patent holders to prove willful patent infringement in order to receive damages. Since this will benefit infringers and will give them fewer reasons to settle out of court, the courts will become clogged with many cases and much litigation.

False patent marking lawsuits would be prohibited, except for those filed by the US Government, or by a competitor who could actually prove competitive injury. This again devalues innovation by a general weakening of patent law.

Post-grant review would be initiated. Although this is said to create a way to evaluate a patent's validity more cost effectively, in actuality it would add more work to the already overburdened Patent Office and likely increase the already large patent backlog.

The patent process is already expensive, and anything that drives up the costs of obtaining a patent will diminish intellectual property rights as many inventors will simply abandon their plans. The Patent Reform Act of 2011 will hinder the process of innovation.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/patents-articles/the-immediate-effects-of-ratification-of-the-patent-reform-act-of-2011-4888319.html

About the Author

The America Invents act stands to change the playing field for all inventors.

Patent application drafting, patent drafting america

Author: Paddy Opton

It is obvious that with every new innovation, there are always companies waiting in the wings to copy that idea and make money on it. If this is to be avoided, it will be necessary to lodge that idea so that no one can steal the plans or idea before the owner of it brings it to the market. Inventors and businesses seeking patent coverage are well advised to study the oracles emanating from the Supreme Court in order to get a patent that can pass muster in the existing case law.

Lack of time and knowledge about the software only exacerbate the situation and many departments give up. Here are some points for you to prepare yourself when you bring IT department into the discussion. Some may recommend a provisional patent application - a sort of place-holder that can have advantageous early-filing benefits. Some may recommend you go ahead with a full utility patent application.

Unfortunately, for decades these requirements were ignored by patent docketing software vendors. Most such vendors made a bulk of their revenues from annuity payment services and hence did not have any incentive to innovate or go up the value chain. Perhaps most importantly, the cost of implementation can be greater than the initial cost. Once the software is in place, the vendor and department need to set it up and populate it with the patents and invention disclosure related data.

For example, new trends in patenting for green technologies is becoming so important that the U.S. Commerce Department of Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO) has just announced a pilot program that will accelerate the examination of certain green technology patent applications. Don't fall for the TV commercials that you see, and never believe any lawyer who tells you that you WILL get money or that they guarantee your win. Unless they are the judge, they can't possibly do that.

This is particularly relevant if it is a big name where a competitor brings out something similar and puts on a very similar logo or name to fool the public into thinking that they are buying originals. Not only is this illegal, it also means that the public will get a raw deal in the end since the goods will undoubtedly be of a poorer quality than the originals.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/patents-articles/patent-application-drafting-patent-drafting-america-4953127.html

About the Author

patent attorney provides many services to an Inventor in various ways. Provisional patent is very important for an Inventor. To learn more about Patent Application Drafting, there are lots of patent search.

Rwanda Contracts PCT, Becomes 144th Contracting State of PCT

Author: Sudhir Kumar

On May 31, 2011 Rwanda became the 144th Contracting State of PCT, however the Provisions of PCT shall be brought into force within 3 months of contracting i.e. on August 31, 2011. The last addition to PCT was on May 3, 2011 when Qatar contracted PCT (though PCT would come into force on August 3, 2011). Before that in 2009 Peru and Thailand were made the members 141 and 142 contracting states. Soon it shall be possible to file and designate PCT Application in 144 countries around the globe. This will provide Application extra time after filing PCT to choose countries where they want to secure their invention.

Republic of Rwanda is a country in central and eastern Africa and as per 2011 census has population of approximately 11.4 million. It is bordered by Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Rwanda is landlocked country.

The per-capita GDP is estimated at $1,284 in 2011. Rwanda joined the East African Community in 2007 and there are plans for a common East African shilling, which could be in place by 2012. Rwanda is a country of few natural resources, and the economy is based mostly on subsistence agriculture by local farmers using simple tools. An estimated 90% of the working population farms, and agriculture comprised an estimated 42.1% of GDP in 2010. Despite Rwanda's fertile ecosystem, food production often does not keep pace with population growth, and food imports are required.

Crops grown in the country include coffee, tea, pyrethrum, bananas, beans, sorghum and potatoes. Coffee and tea are the major cash crops for export, with the high altitudes, steep slopes and volcanic soils providing favourable conditions. Reliance on agricultural exports makes Rwanda vulnerable to shifts in their prices. Shortage of land, water shortage, insufficient and poor quality feed and regular disease epidemics with insufficient veterinary service are major constraints that restrict output. Fishing takes place on the country's lakes, but stocks are very depleted, and live fish are being imported in an attempt to revive the industry.

The industrial sector is small, contributing 14.3% of GDP in 2010. Products manufactured include cement, agricultural products, small-scale beverages, soap, furniture, shoes, plastic goods, textiles and cigarettes. Rwanda's mining industry is an important contributor, generating US$93 million in 2008. Minerals mined include cassiterite, wolframite, gold and coltan, which is used in the manufacture of electronic and communication devices such as mobile phones. Tourism is fast-growing sector and leading foreign exchange earner for Rwanda.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/patents-articles/rwanda-contracts-pct-becomes-144th-contracting-state-of-pct-4984198.html

About the Author

Author is practising Advocate, Registered Patent Agent and Trademark Attorney. Author is partner with IntellexIP Advocates and is member of Supreme Court Bar Association, Delhi High Court Bar Association, New Delhi Bar Association, Asian Patent Attorneys Association. Author can be reached at s.kumar@intellexip.com or www.intellexip.com