PatentAllowed 9 February 2024
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
(T)CMA(PT)/175 of 2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Bench
- N. SESHASAYEE, J.
- Outcome
- Allowed
- Date of judgment
- 9/2/2024
Statutory provisions
Section 117A, Patents Act 1970 — AppealsSection 15, Patents Act 1970 — Power of Controller to refuse applications or to require amendments, etc.Section 3(k), Patents Act 1970 — What are not inventions
Key issue
Whether the Patent Office incorrectly applied Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970, by denying a patent for a computer-related invention without properly considering the 'technical effect' or 'technical contribution' as clarified in its 2017 guidelines and judicial precedents.
Summary
This case involves an appeal by Microsoft Technology Licensing against the rejection of its patent application for 'Delegating Instant Messaging Sessions' by the Patent Office. The rejection was based on Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, claiming the invention did not have a technical effect beyond normal program-hardware interactions. The appellant argued that the Patent Office failed to apply its own revised 2017 guidelines, which clarify that software can be patented if it demonstrates a technical effect, even without novel hardware. The court, referencing previous judgments, found that the Patent Office had not correctly applied these guidelines. Therefore, the court concluded that the rejection was based on an outdated interpretation of patentability for computer-related inventions.
Result: Appeal for patent grant allowed; matter remanded to the Patent Office for fresh consideration by a different Controller.
Tags
#software patent#Section 3(k)#computer related invention#technical effect#patent guidelines
Judgment PDFOpen in new tab
TM