Complex technologies developing in AI and machine learning; we need to update Patent Manual: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently asked the Patents Office to update the Manual of Patent Office Practice and Procedure so that the Examiners and Controllers can address the new and complex technologies developing in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning [AGFA NV & Anr v The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr]..In an order passed on June 2, Justice Amit Bansal noted that the patent applications in these domains either have a large number of claims or involve a lot of features interlinked to each other.“As the number of Patent filings in India are rapidly increasing and there is an imminent need to update the Manual of Patent Office Practice and Procedure so that Examiners and Controllers can get better guidance on dealing intricate matters like objections of lack of clarity and succinctness. This would be particularly useful when dealing with complex patents involving Artificial Intelligence systems, machine learning functions, agrochemicals, pharmaceuticals and manufacturing methods,” the Court said.Therefore, I would recommend to the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks to update or revise the Manual for Practice, the judge said.“This would ensure that Examiners and Controllers can be better equipped to ascertain aspects like clarity and succinctness of inventions. It may also be appropriate to consider giving adequate technical and patent analytics trainings to Examiners and Controllers,” the Court added..The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by a company AGFA NV challenging a June 17, 2022 order of the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, Indian Patent Office, Delhi refusing their patent applications.AGFA had filed an application titled ‘Manufacturing of Decorative Laminates by Inkjet’. However, the same was rejected on the grounds that the amended claims failed to meet the requirements under Sections 10(4)(c) and 10(5) of the Patents Act as they were vague and the scope of claims was indefinite. The Patent Office further said that these claims are not patentable in terms of Section 2(10)(a) of the Act..After considering the case, Justice Bansal said that order under challenge failed to give any reasoning regarding novelty or inventive feature of the claims.The Court further said that this patent application had been granted in various other jurisdictions including the US, UK, Australia, China and various other countries in Europe.In view of the same, the order dated June 17, 2022 was set aside and the Patent Office was directed to grant the patent, subject to completion of necessary formalities. "List before the Patent Office on 14th June, 2023 for completion of necessary formalities,” the Court ordered.It further said that a copy of the order be sent to the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks..Advocate Essenese Obhan, Aparna Kareer and Ayesha Guhathakurta appeared for AGFA NV.Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar with advocates Srish Kumar Mishra, Sagar Mehlawat and Alexander Mathai Paikaday represented the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs..[Read Order]