[Ip-health] Apex court wants expert member on patent board

[Joana Ramos]

http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?autono=3D333422

Apex court wants expert member on patent board
Joe C Mathew / New Delhi September 04, 2008, 1:27 IST

The Supreme Court on Tuesday suggested that the Centre should consider
having an expert member on the Intellectual Property Appellate Board
(IPAB) that reviews decisions of the Indian patent office.

Hearing the case, Justice SH Kapadia and Justice B Sudershan Reddy
suggested that the central government should consider the appointment of
a fresh technical member to hear the first case pending before the
recently constituted IPAB. The government is expected to submit its
response on Friday.

The case went to the apex court after the Madras High Court had asked
the government to hear an appeal from Swiss pharmaceutical major
Novartis against the rejection of a patent for its cancer medicine
Glivec, without the panel having an expert member.

In response, Natco Pharma, the key opponent in the Glivec patent case,
moved the Supreme Court last December. In January, Natco secured an
interim stay order on the HC verdict. The company=92s position is that a
=91technical member=92 is a must on the panel.

The litigation is an offshoot of the country=92s first and most discussed
patent fight initiated by Novartis against the rejection of patent
protection for Glivec in the country.

In November 2007, the Madras High Court approved a government suggestion
to allow IPAB to go ahead with the patent rejection hearing case on
Glivec without a technical member.

The HC ruling was based on a Novartis petition which said that S
Chandrasekaran, former patent controller, during whose term the Glivec
patent was rejected, should not be the technical member when the appeal
comes for hearing. The other two members in IPAB are legal experts =97
chairman Justice M H S Ansari and vice-chairman Z S Negi.

Novartis=92 Glivec has been the most high-profile litigation since late
2005, as it was the first global blockbuster drug that failed to receive
market protection under the changed patent laws in India.

In January 2006, the patent office had rejected Novartis=92 patent
application on Glivec. Following this, the Swiss company approached the
Madras HC challenging the decision.


-------------
Joana Ramos, MSW
Cancer Resources & Advocacy
Seattle WA USA
+1-206-229-2420
http://ramoslink.info/
www.bmtbasics.org