Bridging US/EPO Patent Practice and Indian Patent Jurisprudence Through Doctrinal Depth & 22 Years of Technical Mastery
Comprehensive working paper series deconstructing fundamental prosecution bottlenecks before the Indian Patent Office (IPO) and High Court IP Division (IPD).
Reconciling India's 'Dual-Gate' Inventive Step Architecture with TRIPS Footnote 5 and PCT Article 33(3). Proves that Gate 1 (substantive utility) cures domestic deficits while Gate 2 strictly maintains non-obviousness floors.
Deconstructing the Divisional Dilemma in India: Section 16(1), the Ayyangar Report, and the Fallacy of 'What is Not Claimed is Disclaimed'. Demonstrates Limb 1 ('if he so desires') as India's 35 U.S.C. § 120 continuation equivalent.
The Amendment-Divisional Trap in Indian Patent Practice: Reconciling Sections 57–59 and Section 16. Resolves the double-bind between post-filing claim scope limits and voluntary continuation filings.
The Section 3(e) Eligibility Fallacy in Indian Patent Practice: Decoupling Multi-Component Aggregation from Inventive Step under Section 2(1)(ja). Establishes evidentiary standards for synergistic combinations.
An exhaustive 140-page statutory commentary deconstructing Indian patent practice, legislative reports (Ayyangar Committee 1959), and comparative US/EPO case law. Deposited in Geneva.
"Harmonizing Foreign Continuation Practice (US 35 U.S.C. § 120 / EPO Art. 76) with Indian Patent Procedure." Designed for international prosecution and litigation groups.
Operating on a Barrister-style chambers model, prioritizing selective, high-stakes mandates over volume filing processing.
| Practice Vertical | Regulatory Scope & Practice Focus | Key Deliverables |
|---|---|---|
| Contentious Patent Oppositions | Pre-grant representations (Sec 25(1)) and post-grant oppositions (Sec 25(2)) before the IPO. Section 8 foreign filing status attacks and wrongful obtainment disputes. | Written statements of grounds, prior art mapping, Rule 62 hearing bench memos. |
| High Court IPD Appeals & Litigation | Appeals against Controller refusal orders (Sec 117A) and commercial patent infringement / revocation suits before the Delhi High Court IP Division. | Appellate memos, interim injunction applications, claim construction briefs. |
| High-End Drafting & Prosecution | Specification drafting and global PCT national phase entry harmonization. Resolving combined Section 2(1)(ja), 3(d), and 3(k) FER rejections. | High-density patent specifications, FER response packages, auxiliary claim sets. |
| Software, AI & CRI Patentability | Navigating US 35 U.S.C. § 101 Alice/Mayo Step 2B and Indian Section 3(k) 'Further Technical Effect' rules for AI, cloud, and telecom SEPs. | Section 3(k) technical contribution briefs, hardware-software nexus claim sets. |
Direct partner-led advocacy backed by 22 years of continuous engineering and legal depth.
Gaurav Arora is an Advocate (Bar Council of Delhi) and Registered Indian Patent Agent (INPA-1900) with over 22 years of total technical and legal experience (15+ years in patent law, drafting, prosecution, oppositions, and litigation). He has drafted and prosecuted over 2,000 patent applications globally across software/AI, telecom (5G/SEPs), automotive, and deep-tech mechanical systems.
Holding a dual US-India qualification—passing the USPTO Patent Bar (2016) following an LL.M. from Cardozo Law School (NYC), alongside enrollment in India—the chambers provide foreign law firms and multinational corporations with conflict-free, elite representation for contested proceedings before the IPO and Indian courts.
Arora IP Counsel • New Delhi / NCR, India
Email: [email protected]
SSRN Author Profile ID: 13342608 | Enrolment No: D/2462/2024 | INPA-1900