ALBEMARLE CORPORATION vs THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 19/2022, I.A. 10452/2022 & I.A. 35045/2024 ALBEMARLE CORPORATION .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ankush Verma, Mr. Debashish Banerjee, Ms. Vaishali Joshi, Mr. Pankaj Soni, Mr. Vineet Rohilla, Mr. Rohit, Mr. Tanveer Malhotra and Ms. Gurneet Kaur, Advocates Mob: 9971799662 versus THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Muskan Narang, Advocate Mob: 9811503304 Email: [email protected] CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA JUDGMENT % 07.07.2025 MINI PUSHKARNA, J: 1. The appellant, Albemarle Corporation, a company incorporated in the United States of America, prefers the present appeal under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970 (“Patents Act”) against the impugned order dated 12th May, 2021, passed by the Controller of Patents, whereby, Indian Patent Application No. 2897/DELNP/2012 (“subject application”), was refused Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 19/2022 Page 1 of 10 By:HARIOM Signing Date:07.07.2025 20:24:31 under Section 15 of the Patents Act, in respect of the invention, titled as “SOLVENT SYSTEMS HAVING NO FLASH POINT AND METHODS USING SUCH SOLVENT SYSTEMS FOR DISSOLVING RIGID POLYURETHANE FOAMS”. 2. The appellant’s patent application has been refused under Section 15 of the Patents Act on the grounds that the subject matter of the claims or inventions in the subject application, lacks novelty over cited document D4, lacks inventive step in view of cited documents, i.e., D1-D4 and does not meet the enablement requirement under Section 10(4) of the Patents Act. 3. The appellant had filed the subject application on 04th April, 2012. The respondent issued a First Examination Report (“FER”) on 26 th October, 2017, raising va