News & Legal Developments
News & Legal Developments Country Statistics (India) IP Meetings in 2025
The Indian IP Office functions virtually. All processes from application to grant/registration including oppositions, and post-grant/registration actions including cancellations, are handled online. Hearings are held through video-conferencing mode. Physical attendance at the IPO is not required.
- Only simple deletions of claims are allowed at national phase entry into India. No additions or modifications to claims or specifications are allowed.
- Deleted claims cannot be reintroduced at a later date, including in divisional applications.
- Any necessary amendments not made during the international phase must be submitted as voluntary amendments post-national phase entry, preferably during prosecution stage, as explained below.
- We advise against filing voluntary amendments before the issuance of the FER, as amendments are rarely considered at this stage. The Indian Patent Office often copies objections from other jurisdictions without considering the amendments that have already been made.
- Voluntary amendments before the FER tend to be ignored, making the process costly and ineffective.
- All amendments must be supported by the original specification and cannot expand the scope of the claims.
- The amendments should fall within the scope of the original claims. A marked-up copy of the proposed changes, along with the support and basis for each amendment in the original disclosure, must be submitted to the Indian Patent Office.
- Reducing the number of claims does not result in a refund of excess claim fees, as fees are paid at the time of filing.
- Amendments only by way of explanation, correction or disclaimer are allowed.
- In a recent Delhi High Court decision, the amendment of 'product-by-process' claims to 'process' claims was allowed, provided it was considered a narrowing of the claim scope, and met the conditions under Section 59(1) of the Patents Act.
The Patents (Amendment) Rules 2024 introduced by the Government of India, effective from 15 March 2024, include several key changes:
1. Request for Examination Deadline:
- For applications filed in India before 15 March 2024, the deadline is 48 months from the earliest priority date (or PCT/Indian filing date).
- For applications filed in India on or after 15 March 2024, the deadline is reduced to 31 months from the earliest priority date (or PCT/Indian filing date).
2. Foreign Patent Information (Form 3):
- Form 3 must be filed with the application, updated within 6 months of filing, 3 months after the First Examination Report (FER), and 2 months after any request by the Controller.
3. Section 8(2) Compliance:
- Section 8(2) documents must be submitted within 2 months of an Examiner’s request.
4. Extension of Time for PCT Documents:
- The deadline for submitting the Verified English Translation and Certified Copy of Priority Document is 31 months from the priority date, extendible by 6 months upon petition (with punitive official fees).
5. Divisional Applications:
- Divisional applications can be filed from provisional applications, complete applications, or even from previous divisional applications.
6. Public Display (No Novelty Loss):
- Public display/publication in India will not affect novelty, provided such display/publication is with the inventors consent, and is in respect to exhibition notified by the Central Government, if the application is filed within 12 months of the display, with a Form 31 request and the prescribed fee.
7. Pre-Grant Opposition:
- The Controller will first assess if a prima facie case is made by the opposition. If satisfied, the Controller will notify the Applicant within 1 month of receiving the representation and the applicant has 2 months to respond. The filing fee is US$ 46 for individuals and US$ 232 for corporates.
The Patents (Amendment) Rules 2024, effective from 15 March 2024, introduce significant changes to filing deadlines, with high punitive fees applied for certain actions:
Procedure
[A] New Actions Allowed with High Punitive Fees
Certain actions, previously not permitted, are now allowed with a punitive official fee of US$ 582 per month (up to 6 months). These include:- Filing PCT national phase applications beyond 31 months from the earliest priority date
- Filing Request for Examination beyond 31 months
- Filing response to the First Examination Report beyond the 9 months extension period
- Payment of renewal fees beyond the 6 months extension period
[B] Extensions for Other Deadlines with Punitive Fees
Punitive fees also apply for extending deadlines in the following cases:- Filing English translations of PCT Amendments and Priority Document beyond 31 months
- Filing certified copies of the Priority Document beyond 31 months (in the absence of form PCT/IB/304)
- Filing Form 3, Section 8 documents, and related prosecution materials beyond the first 3 months extension
- Filing Written Submissions after a hearing, beyond 15 days from the hearing date
- Filing Reply Statements to notices of opposition, beyond 2 months
- Filing a Review Petition against a Controller’s decision, beyond 1 month
- Filing the Working Report for granted patents beyond the first 3 months extension
Procedure
- No petition is required for these extensions. The prescribed form, along with the relevant fees, must be submitted to avail the extensions.
The Patents (Amendment) Rules 2024, effective 15th March 2024, set the deadline for filing the Verified English translation and certified copy of the priority document (if form PCT/IB/304 is not used) for PCT National Phase applications at 31 months from the earliest priority date.
This deadline can be extended upto 6 months, with a punitive official fee of US$ 582 per month,
To avoid these high fees, we recommend filing the Verified English translation along with the new patent application.
The Verification form can be signed by the translator, Patent Attorney, or an authorized Patent Manager.
This deadline can be extended upto 6 months, with a punitive official fee of US$ 582 per month,
To avoid these high fees, we recommend filing the Verified English translation along with the new patent application.
The Verification form can be signed by the translator, Patent Attorney, or an authorized Patent Manager.
As per the new Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2024 which has come into force with effect from 15 March 2024, the deadline for filing a Request for Examination is 31 months from the earliest priority date, not 48 months, in respect of a patent application filed in India on or after 15 March 2024.
Legal Basis (Section 16, Indian Patents Act)
An applicant may file a divisional patent application:- At any time before the grant of the parent application.
- To address objections regarding multiple/distinct inventions in a single application.
- For an invention disclosed in the provisional or complete specification of the parent application.
Evolution of Legal Interpretation
- Previous Practice: Voluntary divisional applications were used strategically, often duplicating claims from the parent application. This allowed alignment with global filings and avoided potential invalidity challenges.
- IPAB & 20 July 2022 Delhi High Court Ruling: Restricted divisional filings, stating that such applications must stem from claims (not mere disclosures) of the parent application.
- 13 October 2023 Delhi High Court Ruling: Overturned the 2022 decision, affirming that divisional applications are valid if based on disclosures in the provisional or complete specification, even if not originally claimed.
Key Considerations for Divisional Applications in India
1. Eligibility:
- A divisional application can be filed in response to unity objection raised by the Patent Office or voluntarily to address lack of unity for a distinct invention disclosed in the parent specification.
- Claims not originally claimed in the parent application can be included if they meet the disclosure requirement.
2. Single Inventive Concept:
- Claims directed to a single inventive concept are based on common structural features of the product and not on the basis of the function/use of the product.
- Two different processes cannot be covered in a single application.
3. Claiming Strategy:
- If subject matter in the parent application belongs to the same inventive concept, it may not be separately claimed in a divisional application.
- Subject matter, not held to be patentable in the parent application, may not be covered by a divisional application with claims revised to recite patentable subject matter, if the non patentable claims and the patentable claims lie within a single inventive concept.
4. Timing of Filing:
- Must be filed while the parent application is pending.
- Ideally filed before or alongside the response to the first examination report or filing of final written arguments pursuant to hearing.
- If an appeal results in remanding of the application to the Patent Office, a divisional application may be filed post-remand.
5. Serial Divisional Applications:
- Divisional application may be filed serially from another pending divisional application, even after the grant/withdrawal/refusal of the parent application, on the condition that there is multiple distinct inventions.
6. Lack of Unity Objections:
- Even if foreign jurisdictions do not raise unity objections, the Indian Patent Office may do so, allowing the filing of a divisional application.
- Applicants may file a divisional application on their initiative if a lack of unity exists.
7. Deleted Claims & Divisional Applications:
- Deleted claims from the parent application may be pursued in a divisional application, provided there is a lack of unity between the parent claims and claims of the divisional application.
Due date : The frequency for filing the Statement of Working is now once in every 3 years (instead of annually), beginning from the financial year ( Indian financial year 1st April to 31st March ) right after the patent is granted and is to be filed within 6 months following the end of each 3 year period, i.e between 1st April to 30th September of the third financial year.
A consolidated Statement of Use/Working Report covering 3 financial years has to be filed.
Extension of due date : The Controller may condone the delay or extend the time line for filing of Working Report for a period upto 3 months upon a request made on Form 4 along with the prescribed official extension fee of US$ 116 per month.
New Form & Requirement : The Working Report Form 27 has been changed and made simpler. In case of “worked” patents, the new form no longer requires to provide comments on nature and extent of use or revenue accrued by working / using the patent in India and it is required to simply select “worked”. For 'non-worked' patents the new Form 27 has pre-defined reasons to select from and also allows the patentee to provide their own reasons for non-working.
It is now required to select Yes/No in the new Working Report Form 27 stating whether the patent is available for licensing and patentees can provide contact details if they wish to be contacted by the interested parties for licensing possibilities.
A consolidated Statement of Use/Working Report covering 3 financial years has to be filed.
- For patents granted upto 31st March 2022, next Working Report is required to be filed between 1st April 2026 to 30th September 2026, covering 3 financial years 2023-2024, 2024-2025 and 2025-2026.
- For patents granted between 1st April 2022 to 31st March 2023, the first Working Report is required to be filed between 1st April 2026 to 30th September 2026, covering 3 financial years 2023-2024, 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 .
- For patents granted between 1st April 2023 to 31st March 2024, the first Working Report is required to be filed between 1st April 2027 upto 30th September 2027, covering 3 financial years 2024-2025, 2025-2026 and 2026-2027.
- For patents granted between 1st April 2024 to 31st March 2025, the first Working Report is required to be filed between 1st April 2028 upto 30th September 2028, covering 3 financial years 2025-2026, 2026-2027 and 2027-2028.
Extension of due date : The Controller may condone the delay or extend the time line for filing of Working Report for a period upto 3 months upon a request made on Form 4 along with the prescribed official extension fee of US$ 116 per month.
New Form & Requirement : The Working Report Form 27 has been changed and made simpler. In case of “worked” patents, the new form no longer requires to provide comments on nature and extent of use or revenue accrued by working / using the patent in India and it is required to simply select “worked”. For 'non-worked' patents the new Form 27 has pre-defined reasons to select from and also allows the patentee to provide their own reasons for non-working.
It is now required to select Yes/No in the new Working Report Form 27 stating whether the patent is available for licensing and patentees can provide contact details if they wish to be contacted by the interested parties for licensing possibilities.
The Indian Patent Office has issued the Draft Guidelines for Examination of Computer-Related Inventions (CRI), 2025, for public consultation. These guidelines aim to standardize CRI patent examinations but fail to address several conflicts, potentially undermining consistent application.
Key Judicial Insights on CRI Patentability
Indian High Courts have expanded patentability for CRI, by ruling that computer programs are patentable if they provide a significant technical effect or contribution. This supports innovation in fields like AI and IoT. Inventions must demonstrate clear technical benefits beyond general computing, such as optimizing device performance (e.g., media file management) or integrating hardware and software for novel advancements. The Courts have emphasized that mathematical methods or business processes are patentable if they solve technical problems or enhance processes.
Provisions of the Draft Guidelines
The guidelines introduce dictionary-based definitions for terms like algorithm, firmware, hardware, software, “per se,” and secure system, drawing from sources like the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries and Court rulings (e.g., Madras High Court, Microsoft case, 2024 for definition of“per se”). The guidelines adopt the 7-step "Seven Pillars Approach" (Delhi High Court, 2024)to assess novelty, involving claim analysis, prior art review, and documentation of material differences.
Challenges and Recommendations
The Patent Office’s reliance on outdated, restrictive judgements, rather than recent progressive rulings, leads to inconsistent refusals of CRI patent applications. The guidelines could be improved by including 10 examples of non-patentable inventions to clarify exclusions. If implemented effectively, the guidelines could enhance examination quality, transparency, and support for innovation in India’s CRI sector.
Key Judicial Insights on CRI Patentability
Indian High Courts have expanded patentability for CRI, by ruling that computer programs are patentable if they provide a significant technical effect or contribution. This supports innovation in fields like AI and IoT. Inventions must demonstrate clear technical benefits beyond general computing, such as optimizing device performance (e.g., media file management) or integrating hardware and software for novel advancements. The Courts have emphasized that mathematical methods or business processes are patentable if they solve technical problems or enhance processes.
Provisions of the Draft Guidelines
The guidelines introduce dictionary-based definitions for terms like algorithm, firmware, hardware, software, “per se,” and secure system, drawing from sources like the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries and Court rulings (e.g., Madras High Court, Microsoft case, 2024 for definition of“per se”). The guidelines adopt the 7-step "Seven Pillars Approach" (Delhi High Court, 2024)to assess novelty, involving claim analysis, prior art review, and documentation of material differences.
Challenges and Recommendations
The Patent Office’s reliance on outdated, restrictive judgements, rather than recent progressive rulings, leads to inconsistent refusals of CRI patent applications. The guidelines could be improved by including 10 examples of non-patentable inventions to clarify exclusions. If implemented effectively, the guidelines could enhance examination quality, transparency, and support for innovation in India’s CRI sector.