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 Terminalia chebula (Haritaki), Terminalia bellirica (bibhitaka), Phyllanthus emblica (Amalaki), Zingiber officinale (Adrak), Piper nigrum (black pepper), piper longum (Pippali), Semicarpus anacardium (bhallataka), Rock salt (Saindhav lavan), Black salt (Souvarchal lavan) and Bid lavan for the treatment of Diseases of heart and used as Cardio-tonic from the books – Gadanigrahah by Sodhala (Ayurveda, Exhibit 1 & 4), Cakradattah by Cakrapanidattah (Ayurveda, Exhibit 2), Aryabhisaka by SmkaradajiSastripade (Ayurveda, Exhibit 3 & 5) and Rasayoga Sagara (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 1 are reproduced below.

“Objections:

Claims do not constitute an invention u/s 2 (1) (j) of the Patents Act, 1970, as claims 1, 6-9, 17 and 18 are not new and claims 1-9 and 17-19 do not involve inventive step in view of the following prior published documents:
D1: TKDL (CSIR), RS17/1817 Bhallatakadi Ksarah known since 100 years: Smakaradajisastripade Aryabhisaka-Gujarati Edited (Hindustana No Vaidyaraja) Translation by Harikrishna Bhagwan Lal Vyas; Sastu Sahitya Vardhaka Karyalaya, Bhadra, Ahmedabad, Edn. 12th, 1957, page 136.
( A Copy of citation Enclosed)

Novelty:
D1 discloses the composition/formulation of all the ingredients as claimed in claims 1, 17 and 18. Also discloses the proportion, dosage form and oral route of administration. Therefore, the composition claimed in claims 1, 6-9, 17 and 18 are not new.

Inventive Step:
The claims 2-5 though worded as composition claims but they are actually the process claims as they define the process features. The process claimed in these claims is not disclosed in D1 and hence they are new but and in the absence any specific advantage by this process in comparison to the D1 process, they cannot be acknowledged with the inventive step.”

Full examination report can be referred at 156_MUM_2007.pdf

3. Outcomes of TKDL References in Examination Report

As the outcome of Examination Report based on TKDL Search and other documents cited in examination report, the examination is under process and reply is still awaited from the Applicant SAVITRI VASUDEV BAIKAMPADY, India.