Case Title: Lummus Novolen Technology GmbH Vs. The Assistant Controller of Patents Date of Order: May 29, 2025 Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 12/2023 Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:4614 Name of Court: High Court of Delhi Name of Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee
Brief Facts: Lummus Novolen Technology GmbH filed patent applications for a high-performance Ziegler-Natta catalyst system. The Indian patent office rejected these claims, citing lack of inventive step and obviousness based on prior art documents D1, D2, and D3.
Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the invention was obvious to a person skilled in the art and did not involve an inventive step, upholding the patent office’s decision.
Law Settled: The case clarifies that an invention must involve an inventive step involving technical advancement or economic significance beyond the existing knowledge to be patentable under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, 1970. The evaluation of obviousness is grounded in whether the claimed invention is obvious in light of prior art.
