Authors : Prince F O; Dr. Manjula T

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 2 - February

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/3z2dvz8p

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2v79xev5

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14836686

Abstract : The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (Patents Procedure) Rules, 2010, create a critical structure that guides Indian patent-related appeals for achieving more effective and transparent appellate procedures. Parties appealing Controller of Patents decisions must follow these rules, which establish procedures and requirements related to documentation, verification and representation. The established procedure outlined by these rules works to create a fair and accountable system that enables stakeholders to understand their pathway through the system. The system maintains proceeding integrity due to essential provisions requiring detailed documentation along with verification processes alongside authorised legal representation. Appellants must pay fees according to the specified structure, which prevents baseless claims and allows the Board to dedicate resources to essential matters. The 2010 Rules support economic development through innovation while simultaneously shielding intellectual property rights to create favourable conditions for creations and backing those who produce new ideas. This article demonstrates the critical structure of patent rules to manage patent dispute resolution effectively within evolving contemporary intellectual property domains in India.

Keywords : Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), Patents Procedure Rules, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), Patent Adjudication, Patent Tribunal.

References :

1. Anand, U. (2021). Compulsory Licensing under Indian Patent Law. Jus Corpus LJ, 2, 69.
2. Chauhan, A., & Singh, K. (2020). Intellectual Property Rights in the Digital Age: A Scopus-Based Review of Research Literature. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 7(6), 1-11. https://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2307620.pdf
3. Dixit, P. P. (2021). Revisiting the working of patent requirements under Indian patent law. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 11(3), 386-396. https://doi.org/10.4337/qmjip.2021.03.06
4. Government of India. (2010). The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (Patents Procedure) Rules, 2010. Ministry of Commerce and Industry. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/63738514/
5. Gupta, A., & Raza, A. (2024). Patent law and compulsory licensing: Indian perspective. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR), 29(1), 5-17. https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v29i1.602
6. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/juscrp2&div=303&id=&page=
7. Kodilkar, A. D. (2022). A detailed overview of the patent system. International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology, 11(6), 668. https://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp2022275
8. Lakshman, D. (2023). Understanding The Evolution of Patents Laws in India Through Amendments. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4904430
9. Mischo, W. H., & Schlembach, M. C. (2018). A system for generating research impact visualizations over medical research groups. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 15(2), 96-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2018.1507773
10. Singh, K. (2023). Impact of patent (amendment) act, 2005 on Indian pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR), 27(6), 397-414. http://op.niscpr.res.in/index.php/JIPR/article/viewFile/63793/465482556