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 Curcuma longa (turmeric) for the treatment of Jaundice, Obstructive jaundice, Liver disease, Hyperbilirubinaemia, Enlargement of liver / Chronic hepatomegaly, Cirrhosis of liver and Hepatargia/hepatosis from the books – Qaraabaadeen Najm-al-Ghani by Mohammad Najmul Ghani Khan (Unani, Exhibit 1), Kitaab-al-Haawi-fil-Tibb, Vol.VII by Abu Bakr Mohammad.Bin Zakariyya Al-Razi (Unani, Exhibit 2), Al-Jaam'e-li-Mufradaat-al-Advia-wal-Aghzia, Vol. III by Ziya Al- Din Abdullah Ibn Al- Baitar (Unani, Exhibit 3), Bharata Bhaisajya Ratnakara (Ayurveda, Exhibit 4 & 8), Rasamrtam by Yadavaji Trikamaji acarya (Ayurveda, Exhibit 5), Bhaisajya Ratnavali by Govinda Dasa (Ayurveda, Exhibit 6) and Qaraabaadeen Qaadri by Mohammad Akbar Arzani (Unani, Exhibit 7).

2. Relevant Extract of CGPDTM Examination report

CGPDTM Patent Examiner(s) took cognizance of TKDL references. Extract of examination report at Para 3 & 4 are reproduced below.



“Further the subject-matter of claims 1-22 also lacks inventive step, as being obvious in view of documents retrieved from Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) database:
(i) TKDL Formulation ID, No. PD01/47(Karuvanga Parpam-I):
(ii) TKDL Formulation ID, No. KU1/125 V 285(Huqna Shaeeri):
(iii) TKDL Formulation ID, No. NA4/1465 (Daw-e-Yarqaan):
(iv) TKDL Formulation ID, No. VS01/40 (Sogal Roga Haram); and
(v) TKDL Exhibits 1 to 8 cited in a pre-grant opposition representation by MR. V. K. Gupta, Senior Advisor & Director, TKDL, CSIR, New Delhi.

The subject-matter of claims 1-22 also lacks inventive step because; (a) combination of plants with known-therapeutic effect with further plants with the same known-therapeutic agents, wherein all plants are previously known for treating the same disease to considered to be an obvious combination; (b) in case individual ingredients are already known for the treatment of a disease as a part of traditional knowledge, then it is obvious that a combination product comprising these known ingredients with further plants with the same known therapeutic effect would be more effective than each of the medicinal plants when applied separately (additive effect); and (c) discovering the optimum of workable ranges of traditionally known ingredients by routine experimentation is not inventive.
           The subject-matter claimed in claims 1-22 falls within the scope of statutorily non-patentable inventions u/s 3 (p) of the Act, as being directed to an invention which, in effect, is traditional knowledge of which is an aggregation or duplication of known properties of traditionally known component or components. In this regard, Applicants? attention is drawn to the traditional knowledge related documents retrieved from TKDL.”

Full examination report can be referred at 889-MUMNP-2010.pdf

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

As the outcome of TKDL Pre-Grant Opposition and other documents cited in examination report, the examination is under process.