1. Pre-Grant Opposition under Section 25.(1) of Indian Patent Act 1970

TKDL Pre-Grant Opposition under Section 25.(1) brought to the notice of examination division the prior art references on the use of Punica granatum (pomegranate) for the treatment of Bone fracture, Rickets, Rheumatism, Osteoarthiritis of knee joint and Osteoarthiritis from the books – Kitaab-al-Haawi-fil-Tibb,Vol.XIII by Abu Bakr Mohammad.Bin Zakariyya Al-Razi (Unani, Exhibit 1), Qaraabaadeen Azam wa Akmal by Mohammad Akmal Khan (Unani, Exhibit 2), Boga Munivar Vaithyam - 700 by Bogar (Siddha, Exhibit 3), Bharata Bhaisajya Ratnakara (Ayurveda, Exhibit 4), Bhavaprakasa by Bhavamisra (Ayurveda, Exhibit 5) and Gadanigrahah by Sodhala (Ayurveda, Exhibit 6).

2. Relevant Extract of CGPDTM Examination report

CGPDTM Patent Examiner(s) took cognizance of TKDL references. Extract of examination report at Para 5 & 6 are reproduced below.



“Claims 1-11 are not patentable u/S 3(p) of the Act as they pertain to traditional knowledge. Use of Punica granatum for treatment of osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and bone related disorders is traditionally known. Refer enclosed TKDL documents RS/807, AK/1866, VK5/567.
Claims lack novelty/inventive step in view of prior art documents D1: The Journal of Nutrition; 2005, pages 2096-2102, D2: Osteoarthritis and Cartilage; Jan 2006; pages S115-S116, D3: Acta Farm. Bonaerense; 2002, pages 223-234, D4: 17th Annual Research Symposium, 2006, pages 19-20, D5:RS/807, D6:AK/1866, D7:VK5/567.
        Further, in view of cited TKDL documents, Claims 1-16 lack inventive step as the use of organic solvent and aqueous extracts of Punica granatum for treating osteoporosis would have been obvious to a person skilled in theart from the teachings of the cited prior art documents. If the subject-matter as claimed relates to extracts/alkaloids and/or isolation of active ingredients of plants, which are naturally/inherently present in plants, such claims cannot be considered as novel and/or inventive when use of such plants is pre-known as part of teachings of Traditional Knowledge (TK). When the subject-matter of claims relate to extracts of plant materials containing undefined active ingredients, such claims cannot be said to be novel if the use of such plants or plant materials is pre-known as a part of teaching of TK. However, if the claims relate to alkaloids and/or active principles obtained from the plant materials and structures of the said alkaloids and/or active principles are characterized, which do not form the part of the prior art, such claims cannot be said to involve an inventive step, since the use of said plant materials and their therapeutic effects are known from the teaching of TK. Thus, the prior art motivates the person skilled in the art to isolate the individual ingredients such as alkaloids, flavonoids, phyto-steroids, etc.”

Full examination report can be referred at 1195-CHE-2006.pdf

3. Outcomes of Pre-Grant Opposition & Examination Report.

As the outcome of TKDL references and other documents cited in examination report, the Application is Abandoned U/S 21(1).