SupremeCourt

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Patent agent examination: DIPP notifies changes in the patent agent exam rules

Posted on 11:18 AM by Unknown
Today, the patent office posted on its website, a notification issued by the DIPP on September 25, 2012 prescribing the rules for becoming a patent agent.  This notification is supposedly made in view of a publication in the gazette of India inviting comments.  

"S.O. 2296(E):  Whereas, certain draft rules were published in exercise of the powers conferred by section 159 of the Patents Act, 1970 (39 of 1970), vide notification of the Government of India in Ministry of Industry (Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion), number S.O. 562(E), dated the 16th July, 2012, in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary inviting objections and suggestions from persons likely to be affected thereby before the expiry of a period of fifteen days from the date on which copies of the Gazette containing the notification were made available to the public;"

Our readers would be aware of the decisions of the Delhi High Court in the Anvita Singh case (discussed here) and Renu Bala' case (discussed here) where the Delhi High Court had directed the DIPP to reduce the weightage given to viva in the patent agent examination.

In these cases, the Delhi High Court ("DHC") had struck down the minimum 50% weightage given to viva-voce examination.  "Prescribing minimum 50 per cent marks in the interview may not be appropriate .... when the rule mandates securing 60 per cent marks in aggregate in all three papers i.e. two written and one viva-voce test.   This rule  is therefore  arbitrary  and becomes violative of Article 14 of the constitution.  To this extent namely prescribing minimum 50 per cent marks in the viva voce is struck down.  We, however, leave it to the rule making authority to either give less weightage by prescribing lesser minimum marks which should not be more than 25 per cent."  

The DIPP in the notification has amended the rules as follows: 
In the Patent Rules, 2003, in rule 110,-
(a) in sub-rule (2), against the paper relating to Viva voce, for the figures "100", the figures "50" shall be substituted;
(b)for sub-rule (3), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:-
"(3) A candidate shall be required to secure a minimum of fifty marks in paper I and Paper II and shall be declared to have passed the examination only, if he obtains an aggregate of sixty per cent of the total marks.".

The impact of the rule change would be that a candidate now requires a total of 150 [(100+100+50)*60%] in aggregate to pass with a minimum of 50 in the written papers. 

Applying this new rule to the cases of Anvita Singh and Renu Bala, it seems to me that both Anvita Singh and Renu Bala would pass.  Anvita: [(61+72+(40/2)) = 153], and Renu: [71+59+(45/2) = 152.5 ~ 153]. Other candidates who were on the borderline (passed in written but failed in viva) should now reassess their marks and determine a pass / fail.  

I expect that the patent office may issue a revised list of candidates who qualified the patent agent examination 2011 based on this notification, and also issue a notice for the upcoming examination in 2013 soon.  We will inform our readers of the notice/s as soon as they become available.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in Patent act, patent agent exam, Patent Office, Patent rules, Rajiv, shamnad, viva | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • IPAB on Payyannur Ring
    [*S lightly long post] Background: The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (“ IPAB ”), in its recent order in SubhashJewellery v. Payyan...
  • Satyajit Ray's sketches and copyright controversies
    A copyright row appears to have started between the Satyajit Ray Society and the Delhi Art Gallery, that is organising a countrywide exhibit...
  • Ghost Post: Samsung v. Apple Presidential Enforcement Veto
    SpicyIP subscribers recently received a short blurb from Shamnad on this FT article regarding the hypocrisy of stamping 'national inter...
  • Dorling Kindersley v. Sanguine Technical Publishers
    A recent Delhi High Court order passed on 21 January, 2013  with respect to copyright licensing has come to our notice. An analysis of the j...
  • SpicyIP Tidbit: ALCS August Distribution
    In the UK, the Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society is an organization run and owned by writers that collects money due to its mem...
  • Delhi HC rejects the "Hot News" Doctrine: A Summary
    The applicability of the Hot News doctrine was rejected recently in a landmark ruling delivered by Justice Bhat of the Delhi HC. This post i...
  • IP Research Assistant position at IIT, Madras
    Feroz Ali Khader, MHRD IP Chair at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras, is looking for research assistants to work on various is...
  • Thalappakatti biryani trademark row
    The southern district of Dindigal in Tamil Nadu occupies a special place in the hearts of biryani lovers. In the late 1950s, one Nagasamy N...
  • SpicyIP Tidbit: GI for Pedana Kalamkari Art Form
    Image from here Recently, as The Hindu reports , Pedana Kalamkari art form received GI protection. Members of Vegetable Dye Hand Block Kalam...
  • Loss of an IP Leader: RIP Prof Daruwalla
    Most in the Indian IP firmament may have heard of the doleful demise of one of our IP leaders, Mr. Tehemtan Nasserwanji Daruwalla. He was an...

Categories

  • 126 (1)
  • 3(d) (4)
  • 3(f) (1)
  • 3(i) (1)
  • 3(k) (2)
  • Academic Writing (1)
  • access (10)
  • access to food (1)
  • access to health (3)
  • AIA (1)
  • AIDS/HIV (3)
  • Antitrust (2)
  • Bajaj v LML (1)
  • Basmati Row (2)
  • Biological Diversity (5)
  • Biologics (2)
  • biopiracy (4)
  • biotech (7)
  • Bollywood (25)
  • Broadcasters Rights (5)
  • Budget (1)
  • business method patent (2)
  • Call for papers (2)
  • Cipla (2)
  • Comparative Advertising (4)
  • Competition law (8)
  • Compulsory Licensing (27)
  • condonation of delay (1)
  • Conference (4)
  • Constitution (12)
  • Contracts (1)
  • Controller's decisions (8)
  • Copyright (112)
  • Copyright Amendment Bill 2010 (23)
  • copyright board (4)
  • Copyright Exceptions (6)
  • copyright office (1)
  • Copyright Rules (2013) (5)
  • Copyright Societies (9)
  • Counterfeiting (1)
  • creativity (1)
  • Cross Retaliation (1)
  • csir (4)
  • d (1)
  • D.U. Photocopy Case (16)
  • Darjeeling Tea (3)
  • Data Exclusivity (2)
  • Database (1)
  • DCGI (2)
  • decompilation (2)
  • defamation (9)
  • Designs (3)
  • Designs Act (3)
  • Differential Pricing (2)
  • Dilution (1)
  • Disabilities (3)
  • Disability (2)
  • DMCA (2)
  • Doha Declaration (1)
  • Domain Names (2)
  • Draft Policy of the Indian Government (2)
  • DRM (1)
  • Drug Regulation (7)
  • education (12)
  • Enercon (1)
  • Enforcement (1)
  • EU (2)
  • ex parte (2)
  • exhaustion (3)
  • Exhaustion of Rights (2)
  • Fair Dealing (8)
  • Fair Use (11)
  • Federal Circuit (1)
  • Fees (3)
  • FICCI (7)
  • FRAND (2)
  • free trade agreement (3)
  • FTA (3)
  • G.I. Registry (4)
  • gene sequences (3)
  • Generic medicine (4)
  • Geographical Indication (14)
  • Gilead (1)
  • Glenmark (5)
  • Gopika (34)
  • Guest post (11)
  • guidelines (1)
  • GWU-CII (1)
  • Herceptin (1)
  • hot news (3)
  • ICANN (1)
  • incremental innovation (1)
  • independence (1)
  • india (5)
  • Indian Government (1)
  • Indian patent litigation (27)
  • Indian Pharma (35)
  • Injunction (10)
  • Innovation (7)
  • INTA (1)
  • Intermediaries (10)
  • internet (11)
  • Internet Access Providers (IAPs) (5)
  • Internet Censorship (7)
  • IP scholarship (3)
  • IP aware (4)
  • IP Course (3)
  • IP Education (1)
  • IP Policy (11)
  • IP update (4)
  • ip writing competition (1)
  • IPAB (34)
  • ipchair (1)
  • IPO (1)
  • IPRS (5)
  • IT Act (1)
  • Journal (2)
  • judicial independence (3)
  • Jurisdiction (1)
  • Kruttika (4)
  • Legal Education (3)
  • Legal Research Tools (1)
  • Legal Scholarship (2)
  • library (2)
  • Licensing (7)
  • Madhulika (20)
  • mathematical methods (1)
  • Media law (3)
  • medical method (1)
  • Merck (4)
  • mhrd ip chair (1)
  • Microsoft (3)
  • Middle Path (1)
  • Moral Rights (2)
  • Movies (18)
  • musical work (2)
  • nanotechnology (1)
  • Natco (3)
  • natco defamation suit (5)
  • natco vs bayer (4)
  • need for transparency (1)
  • Novartis (8)
  • Novartis patent case in India (11)
  • NPEs (2)
  • nujs (1)
  • NUJS Conference (2)
  • Obituary (1)
  • obviousness (7)
  • Off-Topic (2)
  • online course (4)
  • Open Access (6)
  • Open Source (2)
  • Opposition (3)
  • Parallel Imports (4)
  • Parliament (1)
  • passing off (5)
  • Patent (52)
  • Patent act (10)
  • patent agent (5)
  • patent agent exam (9)
  • patent agent exam qualifications (3)
  • patent infringement (5)
  • Patent Licensing (2)
  • Patent litigation (2)
  • Patent Office (19)
  • patent pool (3)
  • Patent Prosecution (7)
  • Patent rules (2)
  • Patent Strategies (8)
  • Patents (9)
  • pegasus (1)
  • Personality Rights (1)
  • Pfizer (1)
  • Pharma (18)
  • Piracy (5)
  • plagiarism (3)
  • Plant Variety Protection (2)
  • post grant (1)
  • Prashant (2)
  • Preventive Detention (1)
  • Price Control (6)
  • prior publication (1)
  • Privacy (3)
  • Prizes (1)
  • public health (3)
  • Public Interest (4)
  • Publicity Rights (4)
  • Publishing (3)
  • radio (2)
  • Rajiv (18)
  • Rectification Petition (2)
  • Rejection (1)
  • research (3)
  • reverse engineering (2)
  • revocation (4)
  • rip (1)
  • Roche (2)
  • Roche vs Cipla (1)
  • Royalty (2)
  • RTI (2)
  • Scholarship (4)
  • section 16 (1)
  • Section 3(d) (7)
  • section 8 (6)
  • shamnad (11)
  • Shan Kohli (4)
  • Shouvik Kumar Guha (30)
  • Smartphones/Tablets (2)
  • Social Innovation (1)
  • Software (10)
  • software enforcement (3)
  • software patent (3)
  • Special 301 Report (1)
  • Spicy Tidbits (6)
  • spicyip (1)
  • SpicyIP Accolades (1)
  • SpicyIP Announcements (9)
  • SpicyIP Case (1)
  • SpicyIP Cases (3)
  • spicyip commiseration (1)
  • SpicyIP Events (11)
  • SpicyIP Fellowship (5)
  • SpicyIP Guest Series (22)
  • SpicyIP Interview (2)
  • SpicyIP Jobs (4)
  • SpicyIP Jobs/General (2)
  • SpicyIP Review (1)
  • SpicyIP Tidbits (11)
  • SpicyIP Weekly Review (27)
  • Statutory Licensing (1)
  • STI Policy 2013 (4)
  • Sugen (3)
  • Supreme Court of India (5)
  • Swaraj (19)
  • Tarnishment (1)
  • Technology (6)
  • Technology Transfer (5)
  • TKDL (5)
  • TPP (1)
  • trade (4)
  • Trade Secret Protection (1)
  • Trademark (59)
  • Trademark dilution (1)
  • Trademark Registry (9)
  • Traditional Knowledge (7)
  • Transparency (5)
  • treaty (1)
  • trial (1)
  • tribunals (2)
  • TRIPS (11)
  • UK (3)
  • unfair competition (5)
  • UNFCCC (1)
  • Universities Research and Innovation Bill (2)
  • US (1)
  • US Patent Reform (1)
  • US Supreme Court (3)
  • viva (3)
  • WIPO (5)
  • Working a Patent (2)
  • Workshop (4)
  • writ (1)
  • WTO (1)

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (364)
    • ►  September (13)
    • ►  August (41)
    • ►  July (36)
    • ►  June (36)
    • ►  May (32)
    • ►  April (51)
    • ►  March (66)
    • ►  February (40)
    • ►  January (49)
  • ▼  2012 (131)
    • ►  December (29)
    • ▼  November (42)
      • Civil society sounds the war cry for affordable He...
      • SpicyIP Weekly Review (November Week 4)
      • SpicyIP Tidbit: Bayer makes an attempt to nix NATC...
      • BCCI blocks Photo Agencies in India-England Test S...
      • University of New Hampshire School of Law seeks Ex...
      • Madras High Court rules against ‘safe-harbour’ for...
      • SpicyIP Tidbit: Prathiba Singh wins award for bein...
      • Off-topic: Press Release Journalism by the Times o...
      • SpicyIP Tidbit: ESG sues the Govt. of India & NBA ...
      • Del HC hits a sixer: The Boundaries of Copyright a...
      • Dangers of ex-parte interim injunctions, in full d...
      • A successful academic intervention before the Supr...
      • SpicyIP Weekly Review (November Week 3)
      • Brainstorming the Copyright Amendments
      • IPAB on Payyannur Ring
      • Sugen-Cipla litigation lands before the Supreme Co...
      • October 2012: Controller's decisions at the IPO
      • Estimating the number of Hepatitis patients treate...
      • Spicy IP Weekly Review (November Week 2)
      • SpicyIP Announcement: Copyright Amendments, 2012: ...
      • More puzzling questions about Sugen’s Sunitinib pa...
      • Guest Post: Grievance Officer in the IT Rules - An...
      • SpicyIP Tidbit: Probing further, Sugen’s title to...
      • Part I: IPCheckups & Intellectual Ventures: What a...
      • Part II: IPCheckups & Intellectual Ventures: What ...
      • SpicyIP Tidbit: Did Sugen have proper title to its...
      • 3D Printing: Are we ready?
      • Copyright Enforcement v. Free Speech: Where does t...
      • Patent Office objects to attempts by CSIR & Co. to...
      • DIPP notifies revocation of Avesthagen patent in G...
      • Stocktaking: IPAB’s performance over the years
      • Patent agent examination: DIPP notifies changes in...
      • Tamil Nadu set to register Pattamadai Mats and Nac...
      • SpicyIP Weekly Review (November Week 1)
      • Debating the Business Standard's analysis of the A...
      • GWU – CII ‘Legal Education’ program set to make a ...
      • Kerala loses its sense of proportionality, takes e...
      • President of Costa Rica Passes Executive Order All...
      • Breaking News: Pegasys Patent Invalidated by IPAB
      • Central Govt. dragged to the High Court over secur...
      • Guest Post: "HMT: Time to share benefits with our ...
      • Allegation against ICAR Scientist of falsifying Pa...
    • ►  October (50)
    • ►  September (10)
Powered by Blogger.