FERTIN PHARMA A/S vs ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 25/2023 FERTIN PHARMA A/S .....Appellant Through: Mr. Kshitij Saxena, Mr. Saransh Vijay Vargiye and Mr. Daksh Oberoi, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Arnav Kumar and Ms. Manya Gupta, Advocates. Date of Decision: 18th February, 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA JUDGEMENT TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J : (ORAL) 1. This is an appeal under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970 assailing the impugned order dated 07.02.2023 passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs under Section 15 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970, rejecting the grant of patent in patent application no.202017042442. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit back for de novo consideration. The reason as to why this Court is remanding the matter would be clear from a reading of the impugned order itself. It would be appropriate and apposite to extract the said order:- Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 25/2023 Page 1 of 5 By:YASHRAJ Signing Date:21.02.2026 16:45:38 “3.0 OBJECTIONS Invention u/s 2(1) (j) 1. (i) Subject matter claimed in claims 1-30 is not an invention with in meaning of section 2 (1) (j) of Patents Act, please refer to documents as cited in ISR. Sufficiency of Disclosure u/s 10 (4) 1. Amended claim 19 claimed as the tablet is provided as a three layer tablet. However there is no comparative example of three layers in the complete specification, the examples provided in the specification related to only two layer tablets. Therefore the subject matter of amended claim 19 is inconsistent and beyond the scope of claim 1