- Case number
- (T)CMA(PT) 43/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
Amended claims were rejected under section 59 on the bare ground that they changed the scope from method to composition, with no basis given for the conclusion beyond a recitation of the provision. On inventive step the order offered some reasoning but never engaged the applicant's case on why the cited documents did not lead to the claimed invention. The Registry's own counsel accepted a remand.
Disposition
Set aside and remanded for reconsideration. No opinion expressed on the merits.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.