Reasoned Patent Refusals And Inventive Step

What happened

The Madras High Court set aside a Patent Office refusal of an Elanco application (an oral composition for chronic in appetence and weight loss in companion animals), which had been rejected for lack of inventive step over the closest prior art. The refusal order itself acknowledged that the invention differed from that prior art no safety data on the maximum dose for continued use, and no adverse clinical side effects yet rejected it without explaining why those advantages did not amount to an inventive step. The Court held the bare refusal arbitrary, set it aside, and directed a different officer to issue a reasoned decision within four months. The merits were left open; the patent was not granted.