{"id":9909,"date":"2021-12-20T06:24:24","date_gmt":"2021-12-20T06:24:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/?p=9909"},"modified":"2021-12-20T06:28:08","modified_gmt":"2021-12-20T06:28:08","slug":"delhi-high-court-forces-proving-invalidity-of-patent-on-the-infringer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/delhi-high-court-forces-proving-invalidity-of-patent-on-the-infringer\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court Forces Proving Invalidity of Patent on the Infringer"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">Currently,\nthe Delhi High Court has ordered that when an infringer seeks to defend Patent\nInfringement on the ground that the Patent is not valid, the burden to prove\nthe invalidity of Patent lies deeply on them, and this standard has to be met\nwhen applying the principle of credibility (<strong><em>Anr V Natco Pharma Limited and\nNovartis AG<\/em><\/strong>). Scroll down to check more information regarding Delhi\nHigh Court thrusts proving the invalidity of Patent on the infringer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_65 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-light-blue ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<label for=\"ez-toc-cssicon-toggle-item-6a54bf6493f58\" class=\"ez-toc-cssicon-toggle-label\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/label><input type=\"checkbox\"  id=\"ez-toc-cssicon-toggle-item-6a54bf6493f58\"  aria-label=\"Toggle\" \/><nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/delhi-high-court-forces-proving-invalidity-of-patent-on-the-infringer\/#Invalidity_of_Patent_on_the_Infringer_%E2%80%93_Overview\" title=\"Invalidity of\nPatent on the Infringer \u2013 Overview\">Invalidity of\nPatent on the Infringer \u2013 Overview<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/delhi-high-court-forces-proving-invalidity-of-patent-on-the-infringer\/#Conclusion\" title=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Invalidity_of_Patent_on_the_Infringer_%E2%80%93_Overview\"><\/span>Invalidity of\nPatent on the Infringer \u2013 Overview<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>When an infringer wants to protect <a href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/patent-infringement-analysis\" class=\"text-primary\"><strong>Patent Infringement<\/strong><\/a> because it is not valid, its burden is primarily on them to show the invalidity of Patent. The observation came from Single Judge <strong><em>Justice C Hari Shankar<\/em><\/strong> as he restrained Natco Pharma Limited from selling, exporting, importing, exporting, or dealing indirectly\/directly in <strong><em>API (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient), <\/em><\/strong>including <strong><em>EO (Eltrombopag Olamine)<\/em><\/strong>. Basically, EO (Eltrombopag Olamine) is a compound that aids in increasing platelet production and is mainly used in the remedy of thrombocytopenia (low blood platelet count).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The\nsuit Patent for Eltrombopag Olamine was considered from May 21, 2003, and the\nPatent would remain exists for 20 years. The invention was granted\nnon-proprietary <strong><em>USAN (United States Adopted Name)<\/em><\/strong> \u201cEltrombopag Olamine&#8221;,\nand it is marketed by Novartis under the trade name or term &#8220;<strong><em>REVOLADE<\/em><\/strong>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The\ncourt was already told that Natco Pharma was introducing their brand Eltrombopag\nOlamine in the market. Novartis fought, claiming that Natco Pharma had not\nobtained any license from it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>After hearing the disputes, the court observed that prima facie there appeared to be a fundamental misconception concerning the concepts of vulnerability and credible challenge. The submission advanced by the defendant was forecasted on the premise that the slightest shadow of a doubt, which could be cast on the Patent, was enough to comprise a credible challenge. It exposed the susceptibility to <strong>Revocation<\/strong><sup><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Revocation\" class=\"text-primary\"><strong>[1]<\/strong><\/a><\/sup> &amp; the proposition was entirely misconceived. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Justice Shankar also added that even if a ground was made for Patent Revocation, it couldn&#8217;t be done automatically. It remained a matter of prudence of the Patent authority. The judgment said, \u201cThe grant of such judgment is itself a pointer to the legislative intention that, before cancelling a Patent, the authority is required to please itself that all thoughts have been made and revocation is completely necessary\u201d. It is only when judged on that criterion, a believable challenge to the validity of the <a href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/patent-registration\" class=\"text-primary\"><strong>Patent Registration<\/strong><\/a> as vulnerable to Revocation is made out that an infringer can run away from the outcome of infringement. Hence, the standard is rather high than low.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The\ncourt further said that the infringer never decided to challenge the suit\nPatent either at the pre or the post-grant phase. That means it had not cleared\nthe way before utilising the suit Patent. Only when it was caught in the act,\nthe defendant seek to question the suit Patent&#8217;s validity, the court added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion\"><\/span>Conclusion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Single Judge Justice C Hari Shankar said that the Patent Revocation is a severe Act, and a Patent once issued cannot be treated as easily susceptible to Revocation. The burden to prove the invalidity of Patent lies deeply on them, and this standard or benchmark has to be met when applying the principle of credibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"text-left\"><b>Read our Article<\/b>:<mark style=\"background: #fffd03 !important;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/different-ways-to-maximize-patent-valuation\/\">What are the Different Ways to Maximize Patent Valuation?\n<\/a><\/mark><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Currently, the Delhi High Court has ordered that when an infringer seeks to defend Patent Infringement on the ground that the Patent is not valid, the burden to prove the invalidity of Patent lies deeply on them, and this standard has to be met when applying the principle of credibility (Anr V Natco Pharma Limited [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":9911,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[55],"tags":[943],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9909"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9909"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9909\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9927,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9909\/revisions\/9927"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9911"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9909"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9909"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9909"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}