TMPatentDismissed 8 May 2023
Oneempower PTE Ltd. v. The Controller of Patents and Designs
C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 8/2023, I.A. 5785/2023
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Bench
- Sanjeev Narula, J.
- Outcome
- Dismissed
- Date of judgment
- 8/5/2023
Statutory provisions
Section 117A, Patents Act 1970 — Appeal to High CourtSection 3(k), Patents Act 1970 — Non-patentable inventions (business methods, computer programs per se)Section 2(1)(ja), Patents Act 1970 — Definition of 'inventive step'
Key issue
Can a 'Transaction Reward System' be patented in India, or is it excluded from patentability as a business method or a computer program "per se" under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act?
Summary
This case involved an appeal against the Controller's decision to reject a patent application for a "Transaction Reward System" (TRS). The Controller had categorized the invention as a business method and computer program "per se," which are not patentable under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act. The court thoroughly reviewed the claims and found that the invention's core was a business strategy for managing loyalty rewards. It decided that even if it used technology, the invention did not offer a technical solution to a technical problem. The court upheld the Controller's decision, dismissing the appeal.
Result: Appeal against rejection of patent application dismissed; the invention is excluded from patentability as a business method.
Tags
#software patent#business method#Section 3(k)#technical effect
Judgment PDFOpen in new tab