|
| Hi
ShmanadWhat
I
mea
|
|
 |
|
 |
Hi ShmanadWhat I meant was that we do not need to be overly cacitirl about the Patent Office and simply blame the office for its inefficiencies or inadequacies. The changes are important and they will come slowly but steadily. The present lot of Examiners are young and some of them give the attorneys a run for their money. These are officers who are technology savvy and do not hesitate to check the records of WIPO, USPTO etc during the discussions. In fact patent attorneys are averse to go before such officers because they play by the book and are willing to refuse application if such applications do not satisfy the criteria of patentability. These are the lots who very soon would be taking over the reins as controllers, which in my view should augur well for everyone.India has been an easy country for foreign companies to get patents which have not been granted in other jurisdictions. As Chandra has rightly pointed that a very high percentage of patents are granted in India (conversely very low percentage is refused), shows that our practice has miles to go before the standards of western countries are matched. Therefore, it is important that we as practitioners require being constructively cacitirl about the patent office as well as ourselves. I have been prosecuting in the IPO as well and my experience has shown that the IPO is not averse to changes. In fact, I am of the opinion that if there is a good case and the patent office does not accept it, then we should appeal to rectify the situation or in converse be prepared to be corrected by a higher forum. Either case, the winner is going to be the practice.
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(VISITOR) AUTHOR'S NAME
Maya
MESSAGE TIMESTAMP
19 december 2014, 23:58:35
AUTHOR'S IP LOGGED
106.91.27.10
|
|
|
|
