Tag: patentability of diagnostic methods in India
February 12, 2026
Technology, Media and Telecom
Technology, Media and Telecom
The Hirotsu decision: India tightens the screws on diag...
The law on the patentability of diagnostic methods in India is very clear: they are not patentable under Section 3(i) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970. Over the last few years, the jurisprudence surrounding this exception to ......
February 15, 2024
Intellectual Property | Patent
Intellectual Property | Patent
Patentability of Diagnostic Methods in India
Among the many exclusions to patentability, the Indian Patents Act, 1970 (“the Act”) also excludes “diagnostic methods” under Section 3(i). But the term itself has been applied inconsistently by the Indian Patent Office (“IPO”). This note discusses a recent decision of the Madras High Court on the interpretation of this term and its implications on related patent applications. ......
Startup India 2.0: A Deep Tech Reset
The Indian government has updated the definition, eligibility criteria, recognition process, and compliance framework for startups, and introduced a new category ...
Limits of Director Liability: The Supreme Court on Piercing the Corporate Veil during Exec...
The corporate veil acts as a legal metaphor for the protective barrier that separates a company's obligations and liabilities from the personal assets of the individuals ...
Riyadh Ready: Harmonising India’s Design laws with Global Standards
Following India becoming a signatory to the Riyadh Design Law Treaty (“DLT”), discussed here, the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has released ...
The Hirotsu decision: India tightens the screws on diagnostic patents
The law on the patentability of diagnostic methods in India is very clear: they are not patentable under Section 3(i) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970. Over the last few years, the jurisprudence surrounding this exception to ...
India’s New Deepfake Regulation: MeitY Notifies Amendments to Information Technology...
On February 10, 2026, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology ("MeitY") notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics ...
The Registrar’s “Undo” Button: The Lambretta case and Section 19 of India’s Trademark Act
Trademark disputes rarely move in straight lines. Sometimes, well before a mark becomes opposition-worthy, disputes around ownership may emerge.
Data Protection as a Closing Condition: Rethinking Risk Allocation in Indian Tech Deals
Data protection has historically been considered a compliance issue during transactions, which is generally identified during diligence and only tackled after closing ...
Limits of Claim Construction: Preamble vs. Characterising Clauses in Indian Patent Dispute...
Claim construction is an important aspect of infringement analysis. In several jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, and the European Union...
Urgency in IP Suits: No more Pre-Institution Mediation Hurdles in India?
In a jurisdiction beset by large volumes of litigation, litigating parties must naturally be encouraged to explore alternate means of dispute resolution.
The 2026 NICE Refresh: Codifying AI Services in Class 42 and implications for AI businesse...
The 13th edition of the Nice Classification (referred to as NCL 13-2026) came into effect on 1 January 2026. We have already provided an overview of the changes in the new edition ...
English
Chinese (Simplified)
Japanese