• Investment World
• eWorld
• Brand Line
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest
• The New Manager

Stocks

• Quotes
• SE Diary
• Scoreboard
• Open-End Mutual Fund

Cross Currency

• Rates
  
  

Shipping

• Ports
  
  

Archives

• Yesterday
• Datewise
• Resources
• In Focus
• In Depth

Group Sites

• The Hindu
• The Hindu ePaper
• Business Line
• Business Line ePaper
• Sportstar
• Frontline
• The Hindu eBooks
• The Hindu Images

Our Bureau

Mumbai, Aug 1 Novartis has filed a writ petition at the Madras High Court for a new technical member on the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). The recently set up IPAB is to look into the rejection of Novartis’ patent application on its cancer drug Glivec.

Novartis’ writ on Wednesday comes less than a fortnight after the IPAB dismissed the objection raised by Novartis regarding the appointment of Mr S. Chandrasekaran, former Controller-General of Patents, as a technical member on the Board. The IPAB can take up the rejection of Novartis’ patent application on Glivec only after the appointment issue is sorted out.

The appointment of the former patent controller on the IPAB had irked Novartis, as he was the head of the Indian Patent office when it rejected Novartis’ patent application on Glivec, in January 2006. “We disagree with the appointment of the former Controller General of the Indian Patent Office to the IPAB,” a company statement said.

“We expect the opportunity to explain our case clearly to an objective board. Because the current technical member of the appellate board was responsible for the original rejection of the Glivec patent, and was a party in the patent appeal in the High Court where he had also filed an affidavit on behalf of the offices of the Controller General of Patents & Designs, we believe he cannot act as an impartial member of the Appellate Board,” the note added.

Citing a precedent, Novartis said a recent decision from the Delhi High Court held that “the former Controller General of Patents, Mr Chandrasekaran, cannot be a member of the IPAB panel since he had dealt with the matter under appeal by Magotteaux International in his earlier capacity”.

Novartis at present also awaits a judgment from the Madras High Court on another case regarding certain constitutional provisions in the Indian patent law; closing arguments had ended in early April.

Novartis had raised the issue of incremental innovation and whether it was patentable. Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act excludes important developments in the form of incremental innovation, the company said.

More Stories on : Courts/Legal Issues | IPR | Pharmaceuticals

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Diabetes drug: Dr Reddy’s, Danish co start phase III trials

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line