What is the Novartis dispute all about?
The Novartis patent application for Gleevac was refused under section 3(d) of the Patent (amendment) Act, 2005 which discusses the exclusions from patent eligibility. The section deems certain items as being obvious, and hence unpatentable. On the Indian law vis–vis TRIPS. WTO’s agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) requires all inventions that are new, useful and nonobvious to be patentable. However, what amounts to utility, novelty and nonobvious is left for each individual country. U sing section 3(d), India basically deems a mere discovery of a new form of a known substance as being obvious and hence, not patentable unless it also results in an enhanced efficacy. What amounts to enhanced efficacy is left to the purview of the examin er through patent office guidelines. The statute outlines that forms of known compounds like “salts, esters, ethers, polymorphs, metabolites, pure form, particle size, isomers, mixtures of isomers, complexes, combin
