Critical Analysis: Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. v. Controller of Patents (2026:DHC:5394) C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 24/2023 | Delhi High Court | Decided: 06.07.2026 I. Doctrinal Analysis: Novelty and the "Coverage vs. Disclosure" Question A. The genus-species anticipation problem The core novelty dispute was a classic Markush-genus-versus-species-selection issue. The appellant argued that arriving at the claimed species from the generic Formula I of D1/D7 required " multiple selections " among independent variables (R1–R6), and that the Controller impermissibly relied on more than one prior art document to construct a single "closest prior art" novelty attack — a submission with real doctrinal pedigree, since novelty (unlike obviousness) is ordinarily tested against a single prior document read as a whole. The Court's response — invoking AstraZeneca AB and Boehringer Ingelheim v. Vee Excel — collapses the " covered vs. disclosed " dist...
Madras High Court Affirms Patentability of Computer-Related Innovation Featuring Technical Contribution
Summary The Madras High Court delivered a significant ruling overturning the Patent Office's refusal of a patent application for computer-related invention, clarifying that CRIs are patentable when they demonstrate technical contribution, even without novel hardware. Introduction On November 4, 2025, the Madras High Court, through Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, overturned the Patent Office's rejection of Ab Initio Technology LLC's patent application for "Graphic Representations of Data Relationship." The invention, filed in July 2010, presented a novel method for tracking and representing data lineage in complex data systems. After nearly a decade of examination and amendments, the Patent Office rejected it in July 2020 under Section 2(1)(j) for lacking novelty and inventive step, and under Section 3(k) as a "computer programme per se." The Court's intervention was sought to determine whether the invention constituted a patentable computer-relat...