2442/DEL/2006

THE PATENTS ACT. 1970 (39 of 1970) as amended by THE PATENTS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005 (15 of2005) (with effect from 1-1-2005) &

THE PATENTS RULES, 2OO3 as amended by THE PATENTS (AMENDMENT) RULES, 2006 (with effect from 5-5-2006)

.

And in the matter of the Patent Application Number 2442/DEL/2006 Dated 13/11/2006 and the pregrant opposition filed under section 25(1) of the Patents Act 1970 as amended thereof.

DECISION

The Patent application number 2442/DEL/2006 filed on13/11/2006 was examined and the First examination report was issued on 27/02/2013 with the following objections raised by the examiner that Pre grant opposition was filed under section 25(1), clauses (a), (b), (e) and (h). Invention claimed in claim(s) lacks in novelty in view of US7112191. US7112191 teaches A needle safety device for an intravenous catheter apparatus, the needle safety device comprising: a base capable of receiving a needle; two opposing jaws attached to the base capable of being influenced by the needlle; the jaws moveable between an expanded position with the effective outer diameter of the jaws increased when a needle IS through the Jaws and a collapsed position when the needle is not through the jaws; the jaws permitting relative movement of the needle with the base when expanded, closing around a needle tip, and preventing relative movement of the needle with the base when collapsed. Application for same subject matter of invention was filed by one of inventor in USA before filing in INDIA. Permission to file outside India is taken as per provision of Patent Act or not relevant objection is raised for the same. Claims should start from seprate pages in prescribed format as per provision of section 10 of The Patent Act. Inventive features should be characterized in the claim-1 incorporating the all essential novel inventive constructive features described therein. The word "of" in the claims 2 to 18 is not definitive, it requires amendment by replacing word "as claimed in claim". 1

2442/DEL/2006

Claim(s)16-17 fall(s) within the scope of such clause (i) of section 3. Claim 18 does not contain additional features which in combination with the features of any claim to which they refer, meet the requirements with respect to patentability as per Patent Act. Claims 9-15 relates to an independent Invention. Reference numerals should be given in claims to enhance intelligibility of the claims. Abstract should be filed in accordance with the instructions contained in the Rule 13{7(d)} of the Patent Rules, 2003(as amended in 2006). Title and preamble of claims are not consistent with description. Claim 1 does not sufficiently define the invention and is not definitive, inventive aspects should be characterised for clarity and over the prior arts. The subject matter of the alleged invention does not constitute an invention in view of US 7112191B2. under section 2(i)(j) of the Patents Act so prevalant The copy of the pre grant opposition so filed is being seprately sent. No Form 3 has been filed in relation to foreign filing particulars under section 8 of the Patents Act 1970 as amended thereof. Form 1 with changed address for service in the name of new applicant"s agent and corresponding address for service should be filed. Details regarding the search and/or examination report including claims of the application allowed, as referred to in Rule 12(3) of the Patent Rule, 2003, in respect of same or substantially the same invention filed in all the major Patent offices along with appropriate translation where applicable, should be submitted within a period of Six months from the date of receipt of this communication as provided under section 8(2) of the Indian Patents Act. Details regarding application for Patents which may be filed outside India from time to time for the same or substantially the same invention should be furnished within Six months from the date of filing of the said application under clause(b) of sub section(1) of secton 8 and rule 12(1) of Indian Patent Act. You are requested to comply with the objections by filing your reply by way of explanation and/or amendments within 12 months from the date of issue of FER failing c) which you application will be treated as "Deemed to have been abandoned" under section 21(1) of the Act. The last Date is 27/02/2014. You are advised to file your reply at the earliest so that the office can further proceed d) with application and complete the process within the prescribed period.

Applicant’s agent has not filed a reply to the First Examination report sent and the period of filing the response within the twelve months from the date of FER has also expired.The pregarnt opposition filed by the opponent B. Barun Melsungen AG, , Germany on 13th May 2011 has been communicated as notice to the applicant’s agent vide this office letter No. 2442/DEL/2006G-4/280,281 dated 28 Feb 2013. And there is no reply for the same.

2

2442/DEL/2006

In view of above the application is treated as deemed to be abandoned under section 21(1) of the Patents Act 1970 as amended thereof and therefore Pregrant opposition under section 25(1) so filed by the opponent is also considered disposed of as the application is considered as deemed to be abandoned under section 21(1) of the patents Act which has rendered the Pregrant opposition infructuous under the present circumstances.

Date 12th October 2015 Patent Office Delhi

( NAVEEN MATHUR) Assistant Controller of Patent

3