Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 FEBRUARY 2021

Statement Of Working Requirements (Form 27) And The Changes Affected By The Amendment Of Patent Rules In October 2020.

R. K. Dewan & Co
Explore more from R. K. Dewan & Co

The Patent Office has, inter alia, essentially varied the timelines for submitting the Statement of Working Form.

IndiaIntellectual Property
Mohan Dewan
Mohan Dewan
Author LinkedIn connections

By a Gazette notification dated 20th October, 2020, the Government of India has amended the Statement of Working Requirements to be submitted in Form-27 to the Indian Patent Office.

I) Timelines:

The Patent Office has, inter alia, essentially varied the timelines for submitting the Statement of Working Form (Form 27). This note is being written to dispel some misconceptions about the timelines for submitting the Statement of Working (Form 27).

The extract of the relevant portion the Gazette Notification is as under:

"The statements referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be furnished once in respect of every financial year, starting from the financial year commencing immediately after the financial year in which the patent was granted, and shall be furnished within six months from the expiry of each such financial year."

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Copy, Right? ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC

When an artificial intelligence system is trained on copyrighted news content, and later answers a user’s question using what it learned, has the law been broken? On 24th July 2026, the Delhi High Court answered that question, at least for now. In ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC, Justice Amit Bansal declined to grant an interim injunction against OpenAI, holding, on a prima facie, interim stage view, that the company’s use of ANI’s news content to train its large language models (“LLMs”) falls within the fair dealing exception under Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act, 1957
IndiaIntellectual Property
S.S. Rana & Co.
S.S. Rana & Co.
Article

AI Training Data, Copyright Risk And Commercial Liability: What Businesses Need To Know

On 8 October 2026, USA Today Co. and its affiliated newspaper companies, which publish 19 titles including USA Today, the Detroit Free Press and The Arizona Republic, sued seven OpenAI entities in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that OpenAI copied their journalism to train its models, stripped identifying information from it, and now uses those models to give ChatGPT users summaries that substitute for the original reporting. The publishers seek more than USD 250 million in damages, an injunction and an order for the destruction of models and training sets containing their content.
IndiaIntellectual Property
Legitpro Law
Legitpro Law