Skip to content

CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Patent Databases and Patent Information System

Anand Tech files an Indian patent application and is prosecuting an application for substantially the same invention in Japan. Which statement correctly reflects the information duty under the Patents Act, 1970?

Anand Tech must file a statement giving detailed particulars of the Japanese application along with an undertaking to keep the Controller informed up to the date of grant in India. Section 8(1) imposes this duty without waiting for a request, in addition to the Controller's power under section 8(2).

  1. AIt need only inform the Controller after the Indian patent is granted
  2. BIt must file a statement of detailed particulars of the foreign application and an undertaking to keep the Controller informed up to the date of grant in IndiaCorrect
  3. CIt has no duty unless the Controller specifically asks
  4. DIt must file the statement only if the foreign application has already been granted

Explanation

Section 8(1) requires an applicant prosecuting a foreign application for the same or substantially the same invention to file a statement of detailed particulars and an undertaking to keep the Controller informed, up to the date of grant in India, of further foreign applications. Section 8(2) adds a separate power of the Controller to ask for processing details, so the duty is not dependent on a request.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Patent Databases and Patent Information System shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Patent Databases and Patent Information SystemFree diagnostic mock

More Patent Databases and Patent Information System questions