Lifesaver IP V. Assistant Controller, Suspension Of Patent Rights For Faster Vaccine Distribution, Drafting A Preamble

The LexCampus Weekly Newsletter No. 6

10th February, 2021


This week we look at a judgement by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) that deals with the requirement of an oral hearing against objections raised by the First Examination Report. The IPAB in this case propounded that discretionary powers conferred on the Controller should be exercised in a fair and reasonable manner. The blogpost for this week discusses a proposal tabled by India and South Africa in the World Trade Organisation requesting a suspension of patent and other forms of IP rights in regard to medicines and devices used in the prevention and mitigation of COVID-19. We offer tips on how to draft a preamble to the claims of a patent, and conclude with a patent related question answered by Dr. Feroz Ali.


Lifesaver IP Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

2020 SCC OnLine IPAB 52

The IPAB examined the nature of the discretionary power entrusted to the Controller under Rule 129A regarding the conducting of oral hearings and their adjournment. In this case, the question was whether it was arbitrary on the part of the Controller to refuse the grant of a patent without first deciding on an active application seeking adjournment of the oral hearing. Read more


Suspension of patent protection for accessible Covid medicines: the way forward?

On 2nd October, 2020 India and South Africa made a joint submission to the TRIPS Council with a request that it recommend to the WTO General Council a waiver of certain provisions of TRIPS, specifically Sections 1, 4, 5 and 7 of Part II. The request was made keeping in view the need to accelerate the development and manufacturing of medicines, vaccines and medical equipment used in the prevention, containment, and treatment of COVID-19. This article seeks to examine this request in light of the progress made in the development of the vaccine and the current status of each country to procure the same. Arguments in favour of the proposal as well as against it have been discussed to understand the nuances of the issue. Read more

PATENT DRAFTING TIPS – Drafting a Preamble

  1. When the preamble opens with one noun (for example, “process” or “apparatus”) and goes on to use one or more other nouns, it is often helpful, even if not grammatically necessary, to repeat the first norm at the end of the preamble
  2. If the noun used in the preamble is not the same as a noun used in the body of the claim, then the two nouns are construed as being different. Therefore, it is advisable to specify which noun is being referred to in each part of the recital.


QUESTION: Section 57 to 59 deals with amendment of a patent specification, what is the difference between the amendment made in pursuance of these sections and the amendment made under section 15 of the Patents Act?

ANSWER: The simple answer to this question lies in one document, form 13. When you file an amendment under section 57 to 59 of the Patents Act, you initiate it by filing a form 13. So it is a request that the applicant makes in pursuance of a need to amend the patent specification and section 57 sub-section 6 tells us that the amendment can be done either before the patent is granted or even after the patent is granted. So form 13 is the .. Read more and watch video explanation


That’s all folks for this week

Team LexCampus

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Want to Learn Patent Law?

The most in-depth online course in Patent Law in India at the most affordable price of just Rs.199 per month.


Firstly it changed the approach of looking at the subject. At the first instance bare act seemed dry. The lecture series actually explained 'why' of the topic and statutes. Which helped in understanding the way the things are .

Nachiket Galgali

To receive updates on Patent Case Laws, Patent Articles, Patent Q&A & more in your inbox, subscribe to our free newsletter.