- Case number
- C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 452/2022
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Saurabh Banerjee
- Outcome
- Dismissed
Headnote
Appeal dismissed and refusal of a divisional application for an intermediate compound upheld. The Court held it obvious for a person skilled in the art to replace ethoxy with methoxy to provide alternative intermediates useful in synthesising aminothiazole derivatives, both being lower alkyl, and noted that the prior art documents and the subject application lay in the same field and shared a common inventor, which it treated as of much relevance. On the law, it held that an inventive step under section 2(1)(ja) must be more than a variety or an add-on variation and must lie beyond what is known to a person in the relevant field, so a trivial run-of-the-mill improvement or modification reflecting no creativity is not an inventive step.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.