Skip to main content

Posts

Critical Analysis: Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. v. Controller of Patents

  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...

Regulatory Framework Governing Alcohol Advertising and Labelling in India

Minimum Legal Age for Purchase The minimum legal age for the purchase and consumption of liquor in India is not uniform across the country, being a subject falling within the legislative competence of individual states. Depending on the state, this minimum age ranges from 18 years to as high as 25 years, reflecting the diverse socio-cultural and policy considerations that inform alcohol regulation at the state level. Restrictions on Advertising Through Television Indian law imposes significant restrictions on the advertising of alcoholic beverages. With effect from September 8, 2008, the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Rules imposed a complete prohibition on the advertisement of cigarettes and alcoholic beverages through television broadcasts in India. Advertising Through Outdoor Media While television advertising remains entirely prohibited, certain states permit advertising of alcoholic beverages through outdoor media such as billboards and hoardings, albeit sub...

Delhi High Court Directs Inquiry into Missing Trademark Files: DIPP Admits Records Lost During Registry Decentralization

A writ petition was filed before the Delhi High Court by an aggrieved company, Haldiram, seeking inspection of certain trademark prosecution and opposition files pertaining to its own applications and proceedings before the Trade Marks Registry. In the course of the proceedings, several other parties—similarly unable to access their respective files—applied for and were granted impleadment, joining the petitioner in seeking directions from the Court. Registry's Inability to Explain the Missing Files Despite repeated queries from the Court, the Trade Marks Registry was unable to furnish any convincing explanation for its failure to produce the files sought for inspection. In view of this, the Court directed that an inquiry be conducted by the Secretary of the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), under whose administrative supervision and control the Patent, Trade Marks, Design, and Geographical Indications offices function. The DIPP, in turn, operates under the Mi...

Samsung Challenges Indian Customs' IP Enforcement Rules Over Dual-SIM Patent Dispute

Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., the Indian arm of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., has challenged the constitutionality of India's customs regulations governing the import of goods suspected of infringing intellectual property rights, by filing a writ petition before the Delhi High Court. Samsung India was aggrieved by the action of the Indian Customs Department in withholding clearance of its imported dual-SIM-card mobile phones, pursuant to an application filed by a patentee claiming rights over similar technology with the customs office. Specifically, Samsung India challenged Customs Notification No. 47/2007-Customs (N.T.), dated May 8, 2007—titled the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 —read together with Customs Circular No. 41/2007, dated October 29, 2007, titled Instructions for Implementation of the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 , issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. Under these pro...