CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Patent Documentation, Examination and Infringement
Meera Textiles Ltd, Surat, files a patent application for a new dyeing process. Two years pass and neither Meera nor anyone else has made a request for examination within the prescribed period. Under Section 11B, what is the legal position of the application?
The application is treated as withdrawn by the applicant. Section 11B(4) says that where no request for examination is made by the applicant or any other interested person within the prescribed period, the application is deemed withdrawn. It is neither refused nor kept pending.
- AIt is treated as withdrawn by the applicantCorrect
- BIt is automatically refused by the Controller after a hearing
- CIt is referred to an examiner on the Controller's own motion
- DIt remains pending indefinitely until a request is made
Explanation
Section 11B(4) provides that if neither the applicant nor any other interested person makes a request for examination within the prescribed period, the application is treated as withdrawn by the applicant. Refusal after a hearing is wrong because the consequence is deemed withdrawal, not a refusal order. Section 12 referral to an examiner happens only after a request is made.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Patent Documentation, Examination and Infringement shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Patent Documentation, Examination and Infringement questions
- Veda Pharma sues Kiran Labs for infringing its process patent. Kiran Labs, in its written statement, argues that the patent is liable to be …
- Veda Pharma Ltd sues Kiran Labs for infringing its process patent. Kiran Labs argues that the patent is liable to be revoked on one of the g…
- Dev Agro filed an application and the applicant made no request for examination within the prescribed period; no secrecy direction was issue…
- Rohan Pharma Pvt Ltd filed a patent application. A competitor, Sanjay Labs, which is an interested person and not the applicant, wants the a…
- Arjun Tools sues Bharat Fabricators for patent infringement. Bharat proves that when it made the infringing sales it was not aware and had n…
- Rohan Biotech, a patentee, applies to the Controller under section 57 to amend its specification. Meanwhile, a suit for infringement of the …