Founded in the year 2014 by Sujata Chaudhri and located in the National Capital Region (NCR) in India, our firm provides advisory, litigation and enforcement, and prosecution services in all areas of intellectual property law.
In patent prosecution, defending the broadest possible claim scope is often the preferred starting point. However, there are situations where the cited prior art presents a genuine obstacle, and arguments alone may not be sufficient to overcome the objections raised by the Examiner or Controller. At this stage, the strength of the prosecution strategy depends not merely on whether the claims can be amended, but on how effectively alternative claim positions have been identifi
Why successful prosecution requires more than overcoming objections, it is very important to understand the Patent value currently. Because, one of the most critical decisions in patent prosecution is determining whether to defend the existing claims, amend them, or adopt a combination of arguments and amendments in response to objections raised by the Examiner or Controller. When an examination report raises objections relating to novelty, inventive step, clarity, sufficienc
This is one of the most common questions Indian patent applicants ask after receiving a hearing notice. Many applicants assume that once a detailed response to the First Examination Report (FER) has been filed, the next step should simply be grant. However, patent prosecution does not always work that way. A hearing may be scheduled when, after considering the applicant’s response, the Controller believes that certain objections remain outstanding, further clarification is re
