IP Intelligence
Patent Criticalities
The things that quietly decide whether an invention can be protected - explained before they cost you anything.
Showing 27 of 56.
The prior art nobody checked
Prior art is anything already available to the public, anywhere in the world, in any language, in any form. A team can be genuinely original and still be second - an…
New is the easy part. Inventive is the hard part.
Novelty is a single-document test and it is largely mechanical. Inventive step is a judgement about whether a competent, unimaginative person in your field would hav…
The invention is new - and still not patentable
Indian law has a filter that operates completely independently of novelty and inventive step. Section 3 lists things that are not inventions at all - and something c…
Why a good invention still gets a Section 3 objection
A section 3 objection is a subject-matter objection, and it is answered by evidence and framing rather than by arguing about the prior art. Each clause has its own t…
Software claimed as software
You cannot patent a computer programme per se. You can, on current Indian authority, patent an invention that happens to be implemented in software if it delivers a …
Your claim is broader than your invention
Breadth is not free. Every extra millimetre of claim scope pulls in more prior art and demands more disclosure to support it. A claim that reaches beyond what you ac…
Adding words does not make a claim stronger
It feels safer to describe the invention thoroughly in the claim. It is the opposite of safer. Every additional word is an additional condition that a competitor has…
There is nowhere to retreat to
Claim 1 will often not survive examination. What decides whether you still have a patent worth having is whether the drafter built a ladder of narrower, meaningful p…
You only described the one you built
A specification that describes exactly one implementation gives you exactly one implementation to fall back on. Alternatives you considered and rejected are some of …
The description is thinner than the claim needs
A patent is a trade: a monopoly for a teaching. If the teaching would not let a competent person in your field reproduce the invention across the width of the claim,…
The wrong people are named as inventors
Inventorship is not authorship, seniority or reward. It is a factual question about who devised the invention **as claimed** - and because claims change during prose…
Nobody decided what the priority date was for
Priority is not a property of your application. It attaches, claim by claim, to whatever was fairly disclosed in the filing you are relying on. Treating it as a sing…
The provisional that covered nothing
A provisional specification buys a date for the subject matter it actually describes. A two-page document that states the idea without explaining how it works buys a…
The application is in the wrong name
The applicant is who will own the patent. Getting it wrong affects fee category, chain of title, who can sue, and what an investor sees in diligence - and correcting…
A granted patent can still be taken away
Grant is a decision by an examining office on the material in front of it. Section 13(4) says expressly that it carries no warranty of validity - and there are four …
Somebody is reading your published application
Publication makes your application visible to everyone who competes with you. In some industries, opposition is a routine part of the landscape rather than an except…
Nobody enforces your patent for you
Granting a patent and enforcing it are done by completely different institutions. The Patent Office has no role once a patent is granted - enforcement is a civil act…
The case turns on what one word means
Before anyone asks whether a product infringes, the court decides what the claim means. That single decision then governs both infringement and validity - which is w…
What you said to the examiner is a public document
Every argument, amendment and concession made to get a patent granted sits on a public file that anyone can inspect. It is the first thing an opponent's counsel read…
Why enablement and support are different objections
Support asks whether the claim is fairly based on what you described. Enablement asks whether a skilled person could actually perform it across the claim's width. Th…
The divisional you could no longer file
A divisional application must be filed before the parent is granted. That is a moving target you do not control - and it is the single most common way that valuable …
What you can and cannot change after filing
After filing, you can narrow, correct and explain. You cannot add. Every amendment has to be supported by what was disclosed in the specification as filed - which is…
The patent that only covers what you already sell
There is a version of every application that will be granted: the one narrowed to precisely what you already sell. It is also the version competitors do not need to …
Turning up to the hearing with nothing new
A hearing is the last chance to change the outcome before a decision is written. The Controller has already read the file, so repeating the written arguments achieve…
The data you did not generate
In chemistry, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and food technology, several of the objections you will face can only be answered with comparative data. If nobody gener…
The form that can revoke a patent
Section 8 requires you to tell the Indian Patent Office about corresponding applications filed abroad. It is administrative, it is easy to overlook in a large family…
The invention changed after you filed
A patent application protects what it described on the day it was filed. Engineering does not stop on that day - and the version you eventually sell is often meaning…
This is the Ragulika IP Educational Criticality - our own editorial prioritisation device, to help you decide what to read first. It is not a legal score, it is not calculated from your facts, and it says nothing about the strength of any particular application.
Keep going.
Every explanation here links to the ones next to it. Follow the thread rather than the menu.
Educational guidance, not legal advice. This material is published by Ragulika IP for general education and information. It is not legal advice, it does not create a professional-client relationship, and it is not a substitute for advice on your own facts. Patentability, infringement, prosecution strategy and every other IP outcome turn on the specific facts and on the law and Patent Office practice as they stand at the time you act. Please take professional advice before making a decision, and read the underlying provision or judgment before relying on any point stated here.