Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PATENT SYSTEM”
To
Prof Sapna Deo
D I P R.
By
ANUP.S.BALTE
D.I.P.R.
[2008-2009]
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the work incorporated in the thesis “The
pharmaceutical industry and the patent system” Submitted by
Mr. Anup S. Balte satisfactorily carried out under my guidance.
Date:
Pune
Acknowledgment
Anup S. Balte
Certificate
Acknowledgement
Contents
Preface
Index
1. what is patent
2. characteristics of Invention
3. Institutes for administering the patent system.
4. Salient features of The Patents Act.
5. Patenting in India.
6. Invention which are patentable
7. Procedure For Patent Application.
8. Condition for patent application.
9. Specifications and cliams.
10.Patent works diffrentily in diffrent industries.
11.Patents and research and development in developing countries.
12. Problems of Pharmacutical patents.
13.Inadequate patent protection discourages the development.
14.Pharmaceutical sector.docx
15. R & D cost.
16.Trips and Indian Patents
17.Promising development.
Biblography
Preface
Patents are exclusive property rights in intangible creations of the
human mind. They exist only as provided in the laws of sovereign states, and
can be enforced only to the extent that application has been made and a patent
granted covering the territory of an individual state. Patent rights are limited
in duration, with the global standard being 20 years from the date of
application. The new product, article of manufacture or process described in
the patent application must be something that has never been previously
disclosed anywhere in the world and something that would not be obvious to
a person ordinarily skilled in the field involved. Determinations of whether
these requirements have been met are made by comparing the claims of the
patent applicant against the body of published literature in the field, including
previously issued patents. This process is called examination, and it assures
that no one is able to claim patent rights on anything that already is
existence.
The owner of a patent has the right to exclude others from making,
using, offering for sale, or selling his or her invention for a period of 20 years
from the filing of the patent application. An invention is any new or useful
process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter. An
improvement on any of these items also can be an invention. Patent
rights are territorial in nature and exist only in the national jurisdictions in
which the patentee has applied for and received recognition of his property
rights.
It should be novel
Every country with a patent system has a national patent office where
claims of inventors may be made a matter of public record. As mentioned
above, in many countries there is an examination before an inventor is
given any substantive rights. In other countries patent claims are registered
but detailed examination is delayed until a dispute over infringement arises.
However, even in these countries a search of the prior art is often conducted as
a part of the registration process, and the search results are published so that
members of the public can assess the claims made by the registrant.
Among the major requirements of the TRIPS agreement are the following:
• WTO Member States must provide a level of rights equal to those
provided in the major global intellectual property treaties administered
by WIPO, including the Paris Convention on Industrial Property.
• WTO member states must provide patent protection for at least 20 years
from the date of filing a patent application
PATENTING IN INDIA
An Introduction
The concept of intellectual property (IP) and the origin of intellectual
property were introduced. Perhaps the most important of intellectual
properties is the patents. Patents are most important for two reasons:
1. Patents are a way to make more money for those who obtain a patent
2. Patent policies can be tailored by a country based on its needs to
foster and promote industrial development
3. Patents enable research and development
4. Most importantly, patents provide the most fool proof form of
intellectual property rights.
Patent policy details a country's policy for the patent system. The polices
are made by the legislature and based on this policy the patent statute is
drafted. For example, the patent policy of India in the 1950 was to ensure
that there was local production of drugs. Hence the patent legislation
catered to such a need by so drafting the legislation.
Patent legislation is what is called the Patent Act. The patent outlines the
gist of the patent system in the country. For example, the Indian Patent Act
details what can be patented and that patent applications need to be made in
order to get a patent. Now, those interested in obtaining a patent need to
understand what the application should contain, where the application has to
be submitted etc. All these procedural rules are covered in India by the
Patent Rules. Thus the patent rules supplement and compliment the patent
legislation. Sometimes the patent office issues rules that are within their
powers. These are called as patent notifications. In the US, such rules are
laid down in the form of patent guidelines. In Europe these same rules are
laid down in the form of guidelines or Directives.
A patent itself is nothing but a document issued by the government. This
document tells the holder of the document that a particular product is
protected by a patent. This means that the product is patent protected. This
means that the product is protected from duplication and copying. The
manner of protection is by patents. The person in whose name the document
is issued is the patent owner. Most often, the patent owner will also be the
inventor. Sometimes companies or other entities can also be a patent owner
by entering into an agreement with the patent owner. Such agreements are
called as license agreements. These agreements will essentially give the
companies and other entities (the licensee) the right to sell, produce, re-sell
etc the invention. In return the inventor will get monetary returns termed as
royalties.
Once a person becomes a patent owner, he gets exclusive rights to
sell, manufacture and market the product for a specified period of time. For
example, in the US this is 20 years, in India it is 14 years now. This period is
called patent term. This means that during the patent term no person other
than the patent owner can ever sell the product. Thus the patent owner is
vested with exclusive monopoly rights over that product. This right is the "the
right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling" the
invention or "importing" the invention. What is granted is not merely the
right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude
others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the
invention. Thus there will be no other competing products during the patent
term. Hence the patent owner can meet the demand of the market by
supplying the entire market. Lack of competition also allows the patent
owner to set a higher price for the product since consumers can only access
the patented product.
This monopoly right is given so that research and development leading to
inventions are encouraged. This means that the government encourages
people to invent more and tells that that their incentive for inventing more is
the monopoly rights which enables the inventor to make more money during
the patent term. In return the government ensures that the patent owner
describes the invention, the making of the inventions and the working of the
invention in the application. It then ensures that after the patent term
expires, any person interested can gather the information and manufacture
similar or the same product. Thus the government on the one hand
promotes research and development and on the other hand ensures that the
public continues to get the benefit from inventions. The public make an
implied agreement to ensure that they get the benefit of research and
development for indefinite period by paying a little extra during the patented
term.
Patents affect trade internationally because of the above. That is, a lot of times
patent owners sell products at higher prices. Therefore copying patented
products (called as patent infringement) enable those who copy to sell the
same products at the cheaper price. This affects the right of the patent owner.
Most often, developed countries are the source of research and development.
In these countries, they protect the rights of the inventors by adequate
mechanisms. On the other hand, developing nations could survive only with a
little copying in specified industrial sectors like pharmaceuticals etc. Hence
developed nations wanted what is called as patent harmonization.
The term patent harmonization essentially means that patents laws and
patent protection becomes very similar across the world in all countries. This
will ensure that the rights of patent holders of any country are protected
internationally. Such harmonization is attempted through patent
conventions or patent treaties, (TRIPS is one such convention. Other
patent conventions are Paris Conventions, Patent Cooperation Treaty etc).
These treaties and conventions are enforced by international organizations.
The most important international organization for patent law is WIPO and
WTO. WIPO stands for World Intellectual Property Organization and WTO
for World Trade Organization. The WTO governs the trade related aspects
of intellectual property rights. WI PO is the main organization for the
governance of all the treaties other than TRIPS.
Patents are sought from the patent office by making a patent application.
In the US there is only one patent office located centrally at Washington DC.
The patent office is spread through several buildings in the US. There is one
central patent office in Calcutta and regional offices in India.
The term invention has been defined in section 2(j) of patents Act-1970,
which means new and useful:
Art, process, method or manner of manufacture
Useful machine, apparatus or other article and
Substance produced by manufacture.
The 1970 Act in section 6 reflects the first to file system by placing
emphasis on date of application and not on the date of invention.
Applications for a patent can be made by the true and the first inventor, or
their assignees or legal representatives. The first importer of an invention or a
person to whom the invention is first communicated from outside India will
not be considered a first inventor.
Every patent application has two important aspects that will decide the
fate of the application. These are Specification and Claims. The specification
clause originates from Section 4 of the Patents Act, 1949 of United
Kingdom. The Patents Act provides that every application shall contain a
specification — the specification can either be a provisional or a complete
specification.
Provisional specification:
A provisional specification is a document drawn in a prescribed
format. It contains a description of the essential features of the invention. It
does not include claims and description of manner of performing the
invention. It is notable that in a first to file system like India the date of
application for the patent becomes important. If two inventors file patent
application for the same invention, then the one whose application has the
earlier date has the advantage of being awarded the patent. Therefore it is very
important to file the application as soon as possible. The provisional
specification facilitates this. The date of filing the provisional specification
becomes the date of the application. This date is called the priority date and
this date is accorded to the claims in the complete specification which can be
filed later based on the provisional specification.
A provisional specification should be drawn in Form 2 of the Rules. This
application will contain a description of the nature of the invention. The title
to the provisional specification should give a fair detail of area of science the
application will deal with. The object of the invention and a statement of the
actual invention need to set forth in the provisional specification. The most
important aspect is that when a complete specification is files, the provisional
specification should with reasonable certainty relate to the same invention.
However, it is advised that the provisional specification be couched in broad
terms. This is preventing a competing inventor to seek a broader patent based
on the provisional specification.
Complete Specification:
After filing a provisional specification, the applicant should submit a
complete specification within 12 months of the date of filing of the
provisional application without which the application will be deemed to be
abandoned unless a request to file the same within 15 months is filed with the
controller. If the applicant is unable to file the complete specification within
the prescribed time, then the applicant can request for post dating of the
application for a six Month period. The advantage is that the applicant gets
another 6 months to file a complete specification. The disadvantage is that
the applicant will lose the priority dates. Thus a later filed application may
get priority because of this.
Claims:
All complete specifications end with claims. Section 10 (5) notes that the
claims shall relate to a single invention. The requirement of a claim seems is
"fairly based on the matter disclosed in the specification." The object of
claims is to:
1. State with precision the detail of the invention
1. Define the exact scope of the invention. This will enable a narrow
invention to be patentable later – Example, a claim for a folding chair
should clearly so specify the features of a chair and limit the claim to
chairs that fold. This will enable inventor No 2 to patent a revolving
chair or may be a non-folding chair.
3. To clearly set the limits of the claim. This is interrelated to the above
concept. In the above example, if chairs already exist, and if inventor
No 1 is the first inventor if just the folding quality of the chair, then the
claims should set the limitation properly. This will keep all Chairs
other than the folding chairs within the public domain. That is, this
inventor does not have exclusive rights over that chair. At the same
time, it will encourage other inventors to find newer forms of chair
— say a cushion chair, revolving chair, floating chair and so on.
4. Claims can be narrow or broad based on the invention. A narrow claim
is one that sets the limitations clearly. In the above example, a claim
language is said to be narrow if it limits the patent to a folding chair
only. The claim will be a broad claim if it tries to cover all chairs.
Though on a plain reading a broad claim seems to cover everything and
seems like it is more desirable, in reality it is not. For example, inventor
a gets a patent on all chairs be drafting a broad claim and later inventor
B invents a new 'muscle massaging' chair. The inventor B will also get
a patent over the chair with a limitation that it should have a 'muscle
massaging' feature. Thus a later inventor narrows the scope of the claim
of the earlier inventor. Thus the first inventor will slowly see that other
narrow claims will result in him losing the exclusivity in his market.
Therefore narrow claims are preferred.
The Bombay High Court detailed that the claim and the specification
should be read together to understand the invention. The Delhi High Court
has held that the claim should specify the particular feature of the device and
the distinguishing feature from the earlier invention, if any and show the nature
of the invention. However, the Delhi high court in 1978 held that the title of
the invention claimed has little consequence in controlling the claim. Notably,
the Bombay High Court held that the duty of the patentee to ensure that the
nature and the limits of the claim are laid out with clarity of language. The
Supreme Court of India later clarified that 'by looking at the claim the
description of the invention in the specification should be read in order to
prepare the mind to understand what the inventor has claimed.'
Grant of patents:
After the complete specification has been filed, the application is allotted by
the controller to specific examiners to see whether a patent should issue. The
inventor gets a period of 15 months before filing the complete specification
to conduct further research and incorporate further advances into the
complete specification provided it does not change the Nature, characteristics
of the technology or the invention. The patent applicant will get the
advantage of the priority date of the provisional application in the complete
application so long as the nature of the invention remains the same. If the
nature of the invention is changed the inventor cannot get the advantage of
the provisional specification. This is called the 'Fairly Based' principle. The
examiner allotted by the controller determines the procedural validity and
compliances before proceeding to check the claims. This stage of the
application is termed the examination. Then a prior art search covering
publications in India and abroad is then conducted. Normally the patent office
takes anywhere between 18 months and two years to send the first
examination report the objections of the examiner will be communicated to
the applicant. Section 21 details that an application for a patent is deemed to
be abandoned unless the applicant is able to get back within a period of 15
months or 18 months (if the applicant has sought for an extension of
time). If the requirements are complied with, the applicant will be informed
that the claims are accepted for publication in the Gazette of the Patent Office.
Publication normally takes approximately 6 months. Section 25 of the Patent
Act, 1970 allows for an opposition by any member of the public in making
an application in Form 15, four months from the date of advertisement of the
acceptance of the complete specification. If the applicant overcomes the
opposition and the examiner accepts the submitted complete specifications,
the controller gives notice thereof to the applicant. The acceptance is
advertised in the Official Gazette. Then the application is open to the public
for inspection. The patent applicant has formed this date all the rights and
privileges of the inventor. But he cannot institute proceedings for infringement
until the patent is granted under the seal of the patent office and the date of
the grant of the patent is entered in the register.
Opposition:
In India, any person interested can oppose the grant of the patent within
four months from the date of notification of the acceptance of the complete
specification. A notice of opposition needs to be filed in the appropriate
office within four months. The Indian system envisages a pre-grant
opposition while the American patent system envisages a post grant
opposition called the re-issue and the re-examination. In the American
system the review is based on the error in the patent which can either be an
error in conduct or an error in patent. One the one hand, the post grant
opposition has its advantages because a pre-grant procedure can block the
applicant from getting a patent for many years. A post grant opposition, in a
country like India would facilitate acquisition of patent rights for inventions
that may not be patent eligible or patentable. Recently, China amended its
laws and replaced pre grant opposition with post grant revocation this change
allowed applicants to obtain their patent rights more quickly by speeding up
the examination procedure. India should consider adopting a post-grant
procedure.
In India, there are several grounds for opposing a patent. Some of the most
important grounds are:
a. That the applicant has wrongfully obtained the patent from the
person opposing the application
b. The invention is already known to a person skilled in the art
(obviousness)
c. The invention has been in public use in India
d. The claims do not relate to an invention within the ambit of the Act
e. The best mode is not disclosed in the complete specification. Best
mode is a very important requirement in across the world. The term best
mode means that in the patent application the inventor should disclose
not only the invention but the best method of making the invention.
This is because after the expiry of the term of the patent (that is after
the inventor loses his exclusivity and monopoly rights), the public
should be able to work the patent. Therefore the inventor ought to
have disclosed the best method of making. This requirement is called
the enablement requirement in the US. That is unless the patent
application reveals the best mode of making; the application is not
enabled for the public. Therefore the application will fail. There are
several ways to determining the best mode of making in India as well
as in the US.
Application for an Exclusive Marketing Right:
Application for an exclusive marketing right can be made in Form 27
with a fee of Rs 25,000 payable to individuals and Rs 75,000 payable by
legal entities other than individuals. The controller will refer this application
to a patent examiner. Within 90 days the examiner is bound to make a report.
Based on the report the patent will either be accepted or denied. A record of
the EMR will be maintained in the head office as well as in the regional
offices. If the application relates to say pharmaceutical or food or other
substances in Section 5 of the Patent Act for which product patent is not
available as yet, such application is termed as mail-box application. Though
exclusive marketing rights will be provided for this, the right for a product
patent will b considered once the legislation in India is amended and product
patent is introduced. India has till 2005 to provide for product patents. See
rule.
Applications for Patents under the PCT: Any country that has signed the
PCT is termed as the convention country. India is one such convention
country for filing the PCT applications. The PCT application can be filed if at
least one of the applicants (need not be the inventor) resides or is a national of a
PCT convention country. PCT applications are complicated and merely
technical. It is purely an area for law practitioners to handle. Therefore the
following is a mere gist of the PCT.
However, for Indian scientists when they make a new invention that can be
ground breaking internationally, (even if it is a improvement over the old
invention), it is best to Make a PCT application covering India, Europe and
sometimes even the US if the cost is not too formidable. However, since US
will insist on following the national procedure (after the application reaches
the national stage), it is also best to designate countries like Singapore that
will accept the international search and immediately award a patent.
Several countries are members of the PCT. Therefore an applicant for an
international patent should clearly specify the countries where the applicant
wishes to obtain patent protection. This process is called 'designation'. An
applicant in India can designate some European countries along with India
or even without India for seeking patent protection. At the time of filing
the application has to contain at least one designation. The PCT does not
allow specific designations in the later stage. Therefore two options are
available. One is to designate all states in the beginning (precautionary
designations) and later specific designations can be chosen. This will involve
a payment of 50% surcharge for each specific designation. On the other hand,
all states can be specifically designated but this will also involve a payment
of 10 designation fees.
PCT applications are filed in India in the competent office. The competent
office for filing a PCT application In India is the Patent Office, Calcutta, and
its branch Offices at New Delhi, Bombay, and Madras. A PCT application
will contain the following:
1. A request under Art 4 of the PCT. In this request the applicant will have
to designate contracting states or state where he seeks patent protection.
These states are called the designated states. Where there are regional
conventions like the European Patent Convention, entire Europe can be
made as one designation. An application with such a designation will
be centrally processed under the European Patent Convention. This has
the advantage of avoiding the national stage in each of the European
countries. Also, when the applicant gets a patent, the patent will be
valid for all countries that are members of the European Convention.
1. description of the invention
2. claims
3. abstract of the invention
4. Drawings (where applicable)
5. Fees
7. Claiming priority. This means that the applicant can claim the priority
date (date of application for patent) in another PCT convention
country if that application has been made before the PCT application.
The PCT application may claim priority under the Paris Convention. This
means that if the inventor had made a national application earlier that
date can be considered as the filing date for PCT. Since an earlier date
is likely to be considered this is called priority date. For Indians this
means that you can file a simple provisional application in India as
the inventor is reasonably ready. That gives the inventor another 15
months to continue with the invention before he can file PCT
Application. (This is because 15 months is the latest period to given to file the
complete specification. Otherwise the provisional specification will lose
the priority date in the Indian patent office). A PCT application thus filed
later 15 months can bear the priority date from the date of filing the
provisional application in India. This is a very important advantage. If no
such priority is claimed, then the date for the PCT application will begin with
the international filing date.
Normally 4 copies are required to be filed. But some of the regional offices
have sought only one copy so that they can make the required copies and
send it to the international bureau. India has announced its recognition of
Chinese Patent Office and US Patent Office as authorized international
search and examining authorities in addition to the Australian, Austrian and
European Patent Offices.
The most important issue in the PCT application is the fee. Fees become due
and payable at two stages. One is at the receiving office. That is, for India
these fees are payable at Calcutta or the regional offices at Madras, Bombay
or New Delhi. These offices collect the following fees:
1. Transmittal fee: This is retained by the office in India. This fee
totals to Rs 2,500 for individuals (s), and Rs 8,000 for legal
entities. These include the fee for preparing certified copy of
priority document and transmission of the same to the
international bureau.
2. Search Fee: This is transferred to the international searching authority.
Depending on the searching authority the fee varies from USD 100
to USD 800. But Indian nationals may be eligible for a reduction
of these fees by 75% provided a request for reduction of fee is filed
in a prescribed form.
3. International Fees: There are two kinds of international fees
collected by the receiving office in India. These are called the
Basic fees and Designation fees. Both these fees are transferred to
the international bureau. The basic fee is USD 382. However, in
case the patent application exceeds 30 pages, a fee of USD 9 is
levied for each additional page that needs to be processed. The
designation fee amounts to USD 82 per Designation. A maximum of 6
designations are allowed. Beyond that all the designations are free.
Note that this fee does not include the national fees that may be payable
at the national stage of the application. Therefore one should be very
careful in making the correct designation suitable to the needs of the
market of the inventor. However, the Basic fee, designation fee and
handling fee is reduced by 75% where the applicant or, if there are two
or more applicants, each applicant is a natural person and is a national
of, and resides in India.
Other fees are payable if the inventor wants to seek a non-binding opinion
on whether the claimed invention appears to satisfy the novelty and involves
an inventive step. This is termed as a Demand and is optional. If such a
preliminary examination is sought by designating a country, the application
will enter the national phase in that country after 30 more months. The
advantage of this is that before the inventor starts paying the national fees the
inventor can know whether there are flaws in the application. That way there
are more chances of getting the patent in the country or designated state. For
example, if Europe as a whole is designated in the PCT-application, the
International Preliminary Examination Report that is already available
may favorably influence the granting procedure of the European patent
application. The fees for these can be anywhere between USD 100 to 1000
depending on several factors like which country is being designated. These
fees are known as handling fees and preliminary examination fee. These
fees are also reduced by 75% for Indian nationals residing in India.
SPECIFICATION
Section 112 (1) discusses patent specification.
(1) The specification shall contain a written description of the invention,
and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full,
clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art
to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make
and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by
the inventor of carrying out his invention.
This section specifically states that the application shall contain the
following:
a) written description with a detail of the manner of making and the
process of making
b) To enable a person skilled in the art to make and to use
the invention c) setting for the best mode contemplated by the
inventor to carry out the invention. Each of these is very complex and
technical requirements.
WRITTEN DESCRIPTION
Today, the written description, rather than notifying the public at the
time of patent issuance of the asserted scope of the patentee's property
right, serves as a manifestation of what was within the scope of the
patentee's inventive contribution as of his filing date. Thus, the written
description requirement takes a "snapshot" view of the inventors
contribution based on the disclosure in her specification as originally filed,
and asks whether that "snapshot" reasonably conveys to persons of ordinary
skill that any subsequently-claimed subject matter was truly and fairly part
of that contribution. The written description requirement can be satisfied in
any manner sufficient to convey possession by the inventor. It provides
whether the inventor had actually invented the claimed subject matter as of
the application filing date.
In gist, this requirement essentially states that the Specification shall have
a detailed written description that embodies all the elements of the
invention. There are instances (discussed below in the case) where
although the claims have been accepted, patents have been rejected
because of inadequate written description.
Written descriptions are mechanisms to ensure that inventors do not
change the gist of the invention while filing claim amendments or while
filing complete specifications. The American system also allows filing of
provisional or complete specifications like in the Indian system under Section
111 of the patent statute. Now the written description provides an outline of the
invention when the application is first made. This ensures that inventors do
not claim a wider or a completely different invention either when filing the
complete specifications or when filing claim amendments. A written
description need not always be in writing. In some cases, even drawings have
been accepted as a sufficient requirement of written description.
The Issue:
Plaintiffs in this case had two patents for the manufacture of insulin.
They claimed that Eli Lilly infringed on the patent by using the same
manufacturing process for insulin. Eli! Lily claimed that the patent was
unenforceable because of failure to adequately describe the invention. The
court held for the company. It stated that, to fulfill the written description
requirement, a patent specification must describe an invention and do so in
sufficient detail that one skilled in the art can clearly conclude that the
inventor invented the claimed invention. Thus, an applicant complies with the
written description requirement by describing the invention, with all its
claimed limitations, not that which makes it obvious, and by using such
descriptive means as words, structures, figures, diagrams, formulas, etc.,
that set forth the claimed invention. An adequate written description of a
DNA requires a precise definition, such as by structure, formula, chemical
name, or physical properties, not a mere wish or plan for obtaining the
claimed chemical invention. Accordingly, an adequate written description of
a DNA requires more than a mere statement that it is part of the invention and
reference to a potential method for isolating it; what is required is a description
of the DNA itself. The court looked at Claim 5 of the patent specification,
which described the cDNA encoding human insulin. Claim 5 is directed to a
recombinant prokaryotic microorganism modified so that it contains "a
nucleotide sequence having the structure of the reverse transcript of an
mRNA of a [human], which mRNA encodes insulin." Thus, the definition of
the claimed microorganism is one that requires human insulin-encoding
cDNA. The patent describes a method of obtaining this cDNA by means of a
constructive example. This example, however, provides only a general
method for obtaining the human cDNA (it incorporates by reference the
method used to obtain the rat cDNA) along with the amino acid sequences
of human insulin A and B chains. Whether or not it provides an enabling
disclosure, it does not
Provide a written description of the cDNA encoding human insulin, which is
necessary to provide a written description of the subject matter of claim 5.
The court held that the name cDNA is not itself a written description of that
DNA; it conveys no distinguishing information concerning its identity. While
there was an example in the specification that provided a process for
obtaining human insulin-encoding cDNA, there was no further information in
the patent pertaining to that cDNA's relevant structural or physical
characteristics; in other words, it thus did not describe human insulin
cDNA. Describing a method of preparing a cDNA or even describing the
protein that the cDNA encodes, as the example does, does not necessarily
describe the cDNA itself. No sequence information indicating which
nucleotides constitute human cDNA appears in the patent, as appears for rat
cDNA in an example of the patent. Accordingly, the specification does not
provide a written description of the invention of claim 5.
The second part of 112 (1) discusses that specification should 'enable'
one skilled in the art. Thus this requirement is called the 'enablement'
requirement. This essentially means that there needs to be specific details in
the invention that will enable other people in the future by looking at the
application to make and to use the invention.
The court felt that the dosage amount varied a lot and it seemed like the
dosage was to be administered as taught by the specification, until an
antidepressant effect was achieved especially within the broad daily dosage
range of from about 10 mg. to about 450 mg. Since the specification was too
broad and did not explain how the drug was to be used it, the patent office
was right in rejecting a patent for the same.
This essentially means that the inventor should reveal the best method
of making the invention that is known to the inventor. The policy behind this
is provision is inventors are vested with monopoly rights. In return they need
to educated the public on the invention completely.
CLAIMS
NOTE: This section explains claims and their ambit for better understanding.
Under no circumstance does this section prepare the reader to draft a claim.
Claim drafting is a complex, technical and scientific exercise. It requires
special courses in science as well as law before either a lawyer or a scientist
can draft a claim. A course on claim drafting is a detailed, self-contained
course. No school in India provides this as such. In the United Stated lawyers
are not qualified to draft a claim under THEY ARE EQUIPPED WITH A
SCIENCE DEGREE. Claim drafting requires understanding of complex
science and the ability to appreciate the complexity and distinguish it from
prior art.
Claims represent the limitation of a patent. Claims are defined in the
Patent Act, 1952 (of the United States) in 112 (2) to (6). Section 112 (2) states
that the specification ends with one or more claims.
Section 112 (2) to (6) reads as follows:
(2) The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly
pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the
applicant regards as his invention.
(3) A claim may be written in independent or, if the nature of the case
admits, in dependent or multiple dependent form.
(4) Subject to the following paragraph, a claim in dependent form shall
contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a
further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent
form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of
the claim to which it refers.
(5) A claim in multiple dependent form shall contain a reference, in the
alternative only, to more than one claim previously set forth and then
specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A multiple
dependent claim shall not serve as a basis for any other multiple
dependent claim. A multiple claim shall be construed to incorporate by
reference all the limitations of the particular claim in relation to
which it is being considered.
(6) An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means
or step for performing a specified function without the recital of
structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be
construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts
described in the specification and equivalents thereof."
The claims limit the extent of the patent. This means that claims ensure
that the inventor does not define his patent in very broad terms. For example,
let us assume that the invention is a simple box for storing a few items. If the
inventor simply describes his invention as a box, then nobody else will be
able to invent another box for storage or even other purposes. This first
description will prohibit a second inventor with a box that keeps food
items cool inside from patenting because it will also fall into the category of
a box. Therefore claims are used to avoid such broad and all encompassing
definitions. Thus claims are limitations of the patent. Claims can be
expressed in several ways — there are functional claims, structural claims,
means plus functional claims, product by process claims, dependent claims,
Jepson claims and so on. In reality the sophistication of the claim drafting
mechanism represents the sophistication of the patent system. Claims from
the main pith and substance of patenting. Patent prosecution depends on
claims drafting and interpretation.
For example, in the case of the box in question, let us assume that the
box has a special lock that makes closing and opening easier. The top flap is
the means facilitating the locking of the box. This means performs of the
function of locking of the box.
Given the above, the means plus function claims are likely to read as
" a means to facilitate the sealing of the upper body .."
Note that in the above case, the inventor can patent the box (by
structural or functional language) and the lid with a means plus function
language separately. Also, if the box is already protected by a patent by
another inventor, the second inventor can merely patent the lock mechanism.
This way, different box manufacturers can seek to incorporate the lock and
thus the inventor gets his royalty.
Again, this ensures that some one else with some olther new means
(even if it is to facilitate the same function) will still be eligible to patent the
new invention embodying a different means to carry on the same function.
For example, in the case of the box, assuming that the box is made
from using a process of combining X and Y to derive some kind of plastic
material. Another box made for the same purpose, for performing the same
function will be eligible for a patent if made by a differet process. (earlier the
court used to construe that product was patented and therefore even if the
process is changed, the same product cannot be patented. That has been
overruled in the case of Atlantic Thermoplastics. Although there are several
dissents to this case, it has not been overruled
Jepson claims are essentially improvement patents. These claims are
used when the invention is an improvement over a previous patent. But these
claims are more closely surveyed by the patent office to ensure that they are
not merely frivolous claims.
It is a fact that the world’s poor live without making use of the vast
majority of inventions available in developed countries. While this has
significant implications for the economic gap between wealthy and poor
countries, in most cases the lack of access to the most innovative
technologies is not a necessity. However, to the extent the poor cannot
afford access to necessary inventions, governments normally bear the cost of
providing their citizens with such inventions. Thus, in most of the world,
governments bear the cost of purchasing inventions that relate directly to
sanitation, public health, national defense, public order and security, public
transportation and education. For these inventions, the market is primarily a
market of governments, not individuals.
Since, medicine is the focus of much of the public sector research that
takes place in the developing world, this means a large proportion of
developing country inventors continue to be shut out of the patent system.
firms in appropriating the benefits from innovation follows directly from the
hundred million dollars to discover, develop and gain regulatory approval for
could free ride on the innovator’s FDA approval and duplicate the compound
new drug candidates fail to reach the market. Failure can result from toxicity,
carcinogenicity, manufacturing difficulties, inconvenient dosing
process and gain FDA approval.9 Furthermore, the full R&D process from
decade to complete.
examined the average R&D cost for drugs introduced into the market in the
late 1990s. Data were collected on R&D costs for a randomly selected sample
representative new product approval incurred out of pocket costs of over $400
R&D costs per approved drugs that are incurred during the pre-clinical
and clinical R&D phases. As shown in this figure, expenditures in the clinical
period account for roughly 70 percent of total out of pocket expenditures. This
reflects the fact that clinical trials are very expensive on a per patient basis,
many drugs must be tested for every one approved, and drugs that do make it to
the final testing phase and FDA submission typically require pre-market
capitalized R&D cost for a new drug introduction during this period is $802
million, or nearly double the out of pocket expenditure. Capital costs are
pharmaceutical R&D. More than a decade typically elapses from initial drug
years prior to FDA approval, these costs are subject to greater compounding at
the industry cost of capital of 11%. Therefore they account for a greater
proportion of total capitalized compared to total out of pocket costs (42 percent
versus 30 percent).
R&D costs per new drug approval were observed to have increased at
an annual rate of 7.4% above general inflation when compared to the costs of
in the 1990s compared to the 1980s.12 One important factor underlying this
chronic and degenerative diseases. These conditions require larger trial sizes
to establish their efficacy and longer time periods for effects to be observed.
A number of factors could operate to alter the growth pattern for future
analysts have hypothesized that these developments may actually cause R&D
costs to rise in the short run.13 The basic reason is that these new technologies
many disease targets that are not yet well understood. Eventually this
Biblography
1) The Pharmaceutical Industry and the Patent System
By Bruce Lehman
2) Patents and New Product Development in the Pharmaceutical and
Biotechnology Industries
By Henry Grabowski
Duke University
3) The Introduction of Pharmaceutical product patents in India
By Jean O. Lanjouw
Yale University
4) The Pharmaceutical Industry
By Boldrin & Levine
5) A Medical Patent System for Global Welfare
By Jordan Wane