Skip to content

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Law relating to Patents

Veda Labs of Pune discovers a previously unknown bacterium naturally occurring in the soil of a Kerala paddy field and applies for a patent claiming the bacterium itself as found. Under Section 3 of the Patents Act, 1970, what is the position?

The claim fails because Section 3(c) says the discovery of any living thing or non-living substance occurring in nature is not an invention. Claiming a naturally occurring soil bacterium as found is a mere discovery, and being previously unknown does not make it patentable.

  1. AIt is not an invention, because discovery of a living thing occurring in nature is excludedCorrect
  2. BIt is patentable, because micro-organisms are always patentable as found in nature
  3. CIt is patentable, because it was unknown earlier and so is novel
  4. DIt is not patentable only because it relates to atomic energy

Explanation

Section 3(c) excludes the mere discovery of a scientific principle, an abstract theory, or the discovery of any living thing or non-living substance occurring in nature. The bacterium is claimed as found, so it is merely discovered. Novelty alone does not make a natural discovery an invention.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Patents shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to PatentsFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Patents questions