NATERA INC AND ANR vs THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS

Judgment text excerpt

$~J4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 21st December, 2024 Pronouncement on:9th October, 2025 + C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 16/2023 NATERA INC AND ANR. .....Appellants Through: Ms. Vindhya S. Mani, Ms. Surbhi Nautiyal, Ms. Naina Gupta, Ms. Harshita Agarwal, Ms. Vedika Singhvi, Mr. Ritwik Sharma, Mr. Bhuvan Malhotra and Mr. Devesh Aswal, Advs. (M: 9717065125) versus THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC. (M:9971724716) with Ms. Swati Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Pinky Pawar, Mr. Aakash Pathak along with Mr. Prasad, Deputy Controller. Mr. Adarsh Ramanujan, Amicus Curiae. (M:99999 84703) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present appeal involves an interpretation of the exclusions from patentability in respect of diagnostic methods under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter “the Act”). 3. The appeal has been filed under Section 117A of the Act, challenging the impugned order dated 20th March, 2023 passed by the Respondent – Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 16/2023 Page 1 of 58 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Date:10.10.2025 17:32:42 4. Vide the impugned order the Respondent has refused the Patent Application bearing No. 201817033216 (hereinafter “the subject patent application”) for the invention titled “Methods for Lung Cancer Detection” (hereinafter “the subject invention”). The impugned order has refused the grant of subject patent application while holding that Claims 1 to 4 thereto are not patentable under Section 3(i) of the Act. Further, Claims 5 to 8 of the subject patent application have been rejected in view of Section 59 of the Act. I. F