We are a family of strong 800+ people including 470+ professionals working from 14 locations across India.
We have a rich heritage and enduring legacy which are pivotal in shaping trust, excellence, and unparalleled legal expertise, thus building a strong reputation and a trusted brand.
We started in 1985 in a single room set up by the two founders with no prior experience of working in a law firm. Both the founders had outstanding academic records and focused on their deep understanding of the law to form the foundation of the firm.
Integrity, Knowledge and Passion are the principles that resonate with every member of our LKS family and the work that we do. These values drive us to build a community of legally sound professionals and well-serviced clients.
Everything we have accomplished over the last four decades is a result of our unique way of thinking which is deeply influenced by our core values and principles that define us.
We and our professionals consistently garner appreciation for the quality of our services and the depth of our legal expertise. This consistent acknowledgment serves as a testament to our unwavering commitment to exceed expectations.
Applicability of the Doctrine of Equivalents in the Indian context
By Jaya Pandeya, Pulkit Doger and Niharika Tiwari
A literal assessment of claims against the alleged infringement may at times allow an infringer to find an easy workaround. To avoid such a travesty from befalling the patentee, the Courts have devised tools where even if the literal language of the patent claim is not infringed, the rights of the inventor may be safeguarded. One such tool is the Doctrine of Equivalents. The article in this issue of IPR Amicus seeks to analyse the jurisprudence surrounding the application of Doctrine of Equivalents in India. Observing that the Doctrine is used to determine whether two devices operate in substantially the same way and accomplish substantially the same result, the authors discuss various case law to provide an insight into the evolution of the nature and scope of the applicability of the Doctrine in India. The authors in this regard also discuss the Doctrine of Pith and Marrow and conclude by stating that it will be interesting to witness the direction in which the jurisprudence surrounding the application of non-literal infringement evolves...
Ratio decidendi
No protection under Designs Act even if trademark registration cancelled subsequently – Prior publication by own use – Delhi High Court
Trademark ‘LETROZ’ is not similar to word ‘LETERO’, both used for medicine having same API – Delhi High Court
Exemption from mandatory pre-litigation mediation – Availability in case of urgent interim relief – Delhi High Court
Automatic stay of infringement suit if rectification proceedings pending before Registrar prior to institution of suit – Delhi High Court
News Nuggets
Patents – Finding of lack of inventive step – Some discussion required
Trademarks – Transfer of cancellation petitions, pending before Registrar, to IP Division of Delhi High Court
Patents – Divisional applications – Test of therapeutic efficacy not applicable
Filing of additional documents – Rigours of showing reasonable cause for non-disclosure when not applicable
Time limit within which evidence is to be filed in opposition proceedings
Liability of intermediary in trademark/copyright disputes – Safe harbour available even in case of criminal prosecution
Trademarks ‘RAMU’ and ‘RAMAA’ when are deceptively similar
Royal Stag v. Royal Champ – Delhi HC notes intention to deceive the unwary consumer and to ride on the reputation and goodwill of former
