Thursday, 9 August 2012

IPO Provides List of Patent Applications & Pending in the field of Pharmaceuticals and Food

After disclosing the list of patent applications and patents related to traditional knowledge, the Indian Patent Office has now provided the list of patent applications and patents related to the field of Food and Pharmaceutical. The list of granted patents can be accessed from here for Food and from here for Pharmaceutical. The list of pending applications related to Food and Pharmaceuticals are provided below:

Food: Delhi, Kolkatta, Mumbai and Chennai
Pharmaceuticals: Delhi, Kolkatta, Mumbai and Chennai



Wednesday, 1 August 2012

Contempt Suit Agaisnt Natco filed by Bristol-Myers Squibb

Natco Pharma is in news again in the patent world. A contempt suit has been filed against Natco by Bristol-Myers Squibb for violating a court order that prevented Natco from selling a generic version of Bristol's patented cancer drug - Dasatinib (patent granted in 2006). Natco was ordered by Delhi Court to stick to its undertaking that it will not manufacture or sell a generic version of Dasatinib. Economic times reports that Natco has not only denied the allegations but also filed a contempt suit against Bristol-Myers Squibb for "misinterpreting facts to court".

The generic version sold by Natco costs Rs 9,000 whereas Dasatinib costs Rs 1.5 lakh per month, reports Times of India. The pharma world will keep a close eye on Wednesday on the court proceedings to see how the whole thing unfolds. It will be interesting to see how the court handles this situation - whether the whole matter is seen as an issue of compulsory license or as an issue of contempt of court's order.

Consent from Applicant Required to Provide Search Results to EPO

Starting January 1, 2011, EPO required an applicant to submit search results (without any delay - emphasis added) related to any priority filings (See Amended Rule 141 of EPC).  This requirement was not applicable for priority applications from US, UK and JPO as the EPO electronically received the search results directly from the patent offices of US, UK and JPO. This was made possible because of mutual agreements between the EPO with the patent offices of US, UK and JPO. 

While there is no issue with respect to delivery of search results when a US patent application has been published, the same is not true for delivery of search results for unpublished US patent applications. The issue arises because 35 USC 122 prohibits the USPTO from providing information about an unpublished patent application without the consent of the applicant. 

In order to tackle the above issue, the USPTO recently issued a notice requesting the applicants to file Certification and Authorization form PTO/SB/69 for US applications that will serve as the priority application for their European counterpart. Essentially, this form will act as the applicant’s consent and allow the USPTO to timely provide the search results of an unpublished US patent application to the EPO. Failure to file the form will prevent the USPTO from delivering the search results. The consequence of not receiving the search results on time may lead the EPO to vacate the mutual agreement between the EPO and the USPTO thereby requiring the applicant himself to provide the search results. If the applicant fails to provide the search results on time, the application may be considered as deemed withdrawn. The Certification and Authorization form PTO/SB/69 should be filed before the corresponding European patent application is filed at the EPO.