Intellectual Property Newsletter | October 2025

Welcome to the October 2025 edition of our Intellectual Property & Innovation Newsletter, where we highlight key developments shaping the global IP landscape. This issue features intriguing Weird & Wonderful cases, including judicial action against AI-generated celebrity deepfakes, unusual trademark disputes, and the expansion of trade secret protection to creative works. We also cover important legal and regulatory updates from India and abroad, such as rulings on patented pharmaceuticals, accelerated biosimilar approvals, and evolving patent examination and enforcement trends at the USPTO, EPO, and Unified Patent Court. In addition, we provide insights into major litigation, transactional IP trends, and the growing convergence of AI, technology, and life sciences.

Judiciary Sets New Boundaries for AI and Celebrity Rights

The courtroom has become the new stage for AI clones. In two extraordinary October cases involving Bollywood celebrities Indian courts faced the surreal. Digital replicas of Bollywood megastars Hrithik Roshan and Akshay Kumar were popping up across social media, selling products they never endorsed and starring in deepfake videos they never filmed. On October 15, the Delhi High Court granted Hrithik Roshan an ex-parte injunction against AI platforms, meme pages and e-commerce sellers churning out counterfeit "Hrithik-approved" content from voice-cloned ads to fan-merch using his face.

Just two days later, on October 17, the Bombay High Court stepped in to protect Akshay Kumar from a disturbingly realistic "deepfake" portraying him endorsing a betting app. Both courts treated these AI avatars not as curiosities but as clear IP infringements violations of the celebrities' trademarked names, publicity rights, and moral rights under the Copyright Act. Platforms like Meta and Google were ordered to scrub the content and share user data, marking the first time Indian courts directly tied AI deepfakes to brand misuse and trademark dilution.

[Source]

Fifth Circuit Vacates $1.5M Trademark Award in Fake Lewis Brisbois Law Firm Case.

In one of October's strangest IP tangles, the U.S. Fifth Circuit vacated a $1.5 million damages award after discovering that the defendants had actually formed a fake law firm called Lewis Brisbois LLP, mimicking the real national firm Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP. The impostors used the counterfeit name, letterhead and domain to lend credibility to filings in a tenant dispute effectively committing textbook trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. The appellate court agreed that the misuse of the Lewis Brisbois name constituted false designation of origin and passing off, since it deceived third parties and traded on the goodwill of a registered legal-services trademark. However, it vacated the $1.5 million statutory-damages award, finding that certain claims fell outside the registration period and that damages could not be awarded under the Lanham Act for those unregistered uses.

[Source]

Wu‑Tang Clan's "Trade Secret" Album

Have you ever heard of trade secret protection being used for a music album? Neither had most IP lawyers until now. In PleasrDAO v. Shkreli, a New York federal court ruled that the unreleased, one-of-a-kind Wu-Tang Clan album, 'Once Upon a Time in Shaolin', might actually qualify as a trade secret. Judge Pamela Chen reasoned that because the album's contents were deliberately kept confidential only a single physical copy exists, and it was sold under strict non-disclosure and no-copying conditions it had independent economic value precisely because of its secrecy. In other words, the music's mystique was its legal protection. This is groundbreaking. Trade secret law typically protects confidential business information like formulas, algorithms, or client lists but here it's being stretched to cover creative work.

[Source]

DC Comics Goes After Another European Org for Using 'Wonder' And 'Mum' Together Over Trademark

In October 2025, DC Comics faced criticism for pursuing legal action against a French entrepreneur over her parenting app "Wondermum," alleging trademark infringement with its "Wonder Woman" brand. The app, created by Marion Sobéron to support families and promote anti-bullying initiatives, bears no visual or thematic similarity to DC's superhero franchise. Despite this, DC issued cease and desist notices, prompting Sobéron to seek legal help and launch a crowdfunding campaign to cover mounting costs. Her lawyer emphasized that the only shared element between the marks was the prefix "wonder," with entirely different audiences, concepts, and branding. Observers have condemned the move as trademark bullying, illustrating how large corporations often rely on legal intimidation rather than genuine confusion claims. The case has reignited debate over the limits of brand enforcement and the need for proportionate, good-faith IP protection, especially when individual innovators are targeted.

[Source]

Method of Swinging on a Swing

In one of the most absurd grants in U.S. patent history, inventor Steven Olson successfully obtained a patent for the Method of Swinging on a Swing a patent that describes the obvious, mundane process of sitting on a swing, pushing it back and forth, and repeating the motion indefinitely. The patent claims novelty in this elementary action despite its utter lack of any innovation whatsoever, serving as a cautionary tale about the Patent Office's occasional failure to screen for basic obviousness. Later, Olson's father revealed that the patent was filed simply to teach his five-year-old son how the patent system works yet somehow the USPTO granted it anyway. The case exemplifies why some inventors file patents for genuinely useless ideas: not to market products, but to explore the boundaries of patent protection itself or, in this instance, as an educational exercise. This patent stands out as arguably the most useless engineering patent ever granted it describes no mechanical innovation, no novel application of technology, no improvement over existing swings, and no non-obvious technical advancement whatsoever. It serves purely as a permanent record of the Patent Office's occasional lapses in judgment and remains a favorite reference point when discussing the flaws in patent examination standards.

[Source]

Legal & Regulatory Updates

India Update

NCLAT: CCI Has No Jurisdiction Over Patented Drugs

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) ruled that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has no authority to investigate alleged anti-competitive practices involving patented pharmaceutical products, as such matters fall exclusively under the Patents Act, 1970. The case stemmed from a complaint by hospital CEO Swapan Dey against Swiss drugmaker Vifor International AG, accusing it of abusing dominance by restricting supply and overpricing its patented anemia drug Ferric Carboxymaltose (FCM). The CCI had dismissed the complaint in 2022, finding Vifor's licensing with Indian firms Emcure and Lupin to be fair. Upholding that view, the NCLAT clarified that disputes concerning patent use must be governed by patent law, not competition law. The Tribunal further noted that since Vifor's patent expired in October 2023, FCM is now in the public domain, eliminating any ongoing concern over anti-competitive conduct.

[Source]

India to gain from the US FDA's move to fast-track biosimilar approvals

The US FDA released draft guidance to simplify and accelerate biosimilar approvals by reducing the need for comparative human trials and focusing on analytical testing. The reform is expected to lower development costs, expand market access, and streamline interchangeability for biosimilars. For India, a key global hub for affordable biologics, this presents major export and collaboration opportunities as more biologic drugs lose exclusivity in the US. The move strengthens the US-India pharma partnership and supports global access to cost-effective biologic treatments.

[Source]

Global Update

WIPO Welcomes Brazil's BRL 1.5 Million Pledge for IP Capacity Building: On Oct. 20, WIPO announced that Brazil made a voluntary contribution of 1.5 million Brazilian real (~\$279k) to the WIPO Development Agenda Trust Fund. The funds are earmarked for IP capacity-building in Latin America, the Caribbean and Portuguese-speaking Africa. This "South-South" support is a win for regional IP development, funding training, legal assistance, and IP awareness projects. For global IP counsel, it signals increasing IP engagement in emerging markets and potential collaboration opportunities funded by WIPO's programs.

[Source]

Scientific Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a Reference Product: Updated Recommendations for Assessing the Need for Comparative Efficacy Studies

The FDA's draft guidance (October 2025) updates its scientific approach to demonstrating biosimilarity under section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act. It emphasizes that when analytical and functional data sufficiently establish similarity between a biosimilar and its reference product, comparative efficacy studies (CES) may no longer be required. The guidance highlights that advanced analytical tools and pharmacokinetic studies now provide more sensitive and reliable assessments than traditional clinical trials. Sponsors are encouraged to adopt a streamlined, evidence-based pathway using analytical characterization, immunogenicity, and PK studies to prove biosimilarity. However, CES may still be necessary for locally acting biologics or cases where pharmacokinetic comparison is not feasible. Overall, the document signals a shift toward faster, science-driven biosimilar approvals focused on data precision rather than redundant human trials.

[Source]

USPTO Launches Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Program

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has launched the Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Program to help speed up the review process for certain patent applications. It's designed to test whether keeping claim sets short and simple can lead to faster decisions and better examination quality. Starting October 27, 2025, inventors can apply to have their qualifying utility patent applications reviewed ahead of others so long as they haven't yet been assigned to an examiner. To take part, applicants need to submit a specific petition form (PTO/SB/472), pay a fee, and agree to stick to the program's claim limits throughout the process. The USPTO will keep accepting petitions until October 27, 2026, or until each Technology Center hits its cap of around 200 accepted applications, whichever comes first.

[Source]

Director Assumes Institution Authority for IPR and PGR Proceedings

The USPTO announced that the Director will personally decide merits-based institution determinations for inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) proceedings. Proposed rules also aim to limit duplicative challenges where validity is or will be adjudicated in other venues. This policy shift signals tighter gatekeeping for post-grant proceedings and introduces greater predictability into patent enforcement strategies.

[Source]

EPO and FICPI Strengthen Dialogue on AI and Patent Examination

The European Patent Office (EPO) and the International Federation of Intellectual Property Attorneys (FICPI) held discussions emphasizing responsible AI integration in patent examination workflows. The EPO highlighted its use of AI-assisted search and drafting tools, such as ANSERA, while stressing the importance of transparency and human oversight. This development is particularly relevant to engineering applicants navigating complex prior art landscapes in fields such as electronics, mechanical systems, and telecommunications.

[Source]

Deep Dive of the Trending Cases

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ag & Anr vs Natco Pharma Limited on October 9, 2025

This matter centered on Risdiplam, a therapy for Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), protected under Roche's Indian patent. Roche alleged that Natco's proposed product infringed the core compound and process claims of its patent, while Natco contended lack of novelty and inventive step under Sections 2(1)(j) and 3(d). The Single Judge had declined to grant an interim injunction, prompting Roche's appeal before the Division Bench. The Division Bench found no error in the lower-court decision and reiterated that Roche had failed to make a prima facie case of infringement. The Bench observed that Natco's invalidity defense raised substantial doubts about patentability, including prior-art overlap and structural similarity. Delay in enforcement and the drug's life-saving character further persuaded the court against interim restraint. Roche's appeal was accordingly dismissed, allowing Natco's continued manufacture of generic Risdiplam in India.

DLL Insights: The decision underscores India's judicial approach that public-health access and equitable balance outweigh monopoly enforcement for essential drugs. Innovators are reminded to strengthen exclusivity through multi-layered patent portfolios (compound + formulation + process) and to act promptly when infringement is suspected. For generics, it validates scientific invalidity defenses and 3(d) challenges as decisive litigation tools. Strategically, global pharma must align enforcement and access policies to preserve credibility before Indian courts.

[Source]

Sequenom Inc & Anr vs The Controller of Patents on October 9, 2025

Sequenom appealed against the Indian Patent Office's rejection of its application relating to a non-invasive prenatal diagnostic (NIPD) method based on detecting cell-free fetal DNA (cff-DNA) in maternal plasma. The Controller had denied grant under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act, ruling that the claimed process was a diagnostic method practiced on the human body. Sequenom argued that the process was analytical, not therapeutic or surgical, and therefore patent-eligible.

The Delhi High Court reviewed the claim set and concluded that although detection occurred on a biological sample, the invention's core contribution was analytical, aimed at determining genetic characteristics rather than performing a medical procedure per se. However, the Court held that the Controller's rejection lacked sufficient reasoning and directed reconsideration of the claims with appropriate scientific and legal analysis. Importantly, it clarified that the mere use of a biological sample does not automatically trigger Section 3(i) exclusion.

DLL Analysis: This judgment provides a critical interpretive shift for biotech and diagnostic patents in India, indicating that analytical and in-vitro methods may escape the Section 3(i) exclusion if properly framed. Patent applicants should draft claims emphasizing analytical endpoints and molecular detection steps, avoiding language suggestive of therapeutic practice. The decision encourages the Patent Office to adopt a scientific-context-based approach rather than a blanket exclusion, signaling a friendlier environment for molecular diagnostics and precision-medicine inventions.

[Source]

CSIR v Controller of Patents (LPA 836/2023, Delhi High Court, 6 October 2025)

The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) appealed against the rejection of its divisional patent application relating to a process for synthesizing an improved chemical intermediate. The Patent Office had refused the application on grounds of lack of inventive step and Section 3(d), holding that the modified process produced no enhanced efficacy over existing methods. CSIR argued that the process achieved superior yield and purity and therefore qualified as a technical advance.

The Division Bench upheld the rejection, observing that improved yield or purity, absent demonstrable enhancement of efficacy or distinct technical effect, does not meet the statutory threshold. The Court emphasized that patentability cannot rest solely on process optimization or resource efficiency without inventive ingenuity. It also affirmed that divisional filings must be supported by clear claim distinction and disclosure in the parent specification, which CSIR had failed to establish.

DLL Analysis: The ruling reiterates India's high patentability bar for incremental chemical or process innovations. Applicants must demonstrate qualitative technical advancement, such as a new mechanism, structural transformation, or superior efficacy to satisfy Section 2(1)(ja) and 3(d). Public-sector research bodies should institutionalize robust data generation and claim-drafting frameworks to translate laboratory improvements into patent-eligible inventions. For industry practitioners, the judgment reinforces the importance of early disclosure planning and rigorous experimental validation before pursuing divisional or process patents.

[Source]

Globally

Global Semiconductor Litigation: TSMC 7nm-2nm Process Technologies Under Challenge

In October 2025, ongoing ITC Section 337 proceedings involved Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and its advanced 7nm-2nm process node technologies. The investigation, initiated by MSL (an IP litigation firm representing unnamed patentees), seeks to prevent the importation and sale of semiconductors manufactured using TSMC's advanced process nodes-technologies that power artificial intelligence accelerators, including NVIDIA's H100, B100, and B200 chips critical to cloud computing and AI infrastructure.

TSMC's 7nm and 2nm nodes incorporate advanced photolithography, extreme ultraviolet (EUV) patterning, and gate-all-around (GAA) transistor architectures. The disputed patent claims allegedly cover fundamental process steps, such as fin patterning, spacer engineering, or metal-gate integration, that are core to these advanced nodes.

DLL Analysis: This high-stakes litigation underscores the strategic importance of semiconductor process patents and the ITC's expanded role in enforcing them. Foundries and fabless design companies should conduct comprehensive freedom-to-operate analyses for advanced process nodes, engage patent counsel for defensive portfolio assessment, and prepare cross-licensing strategies to counter aggressive enforcement campaigns. The outcome will significantly influence global semiconductor supply chains and AI chip availability.

[Source]

Federal Circuit Affirms Wireless Power Transfer Patent Obviousness Rejection

In Nera Innovations Limited v. Squires, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB final written decision holding Nera's wireless power transfer patent claims (U.S. Patent No. 7,825,537) unpatentable for obviousness. The patent covered inductive power transfer systems from base units to target units-technology critical to wireless charging devices and electric vehicles.

The Board found all challenged claims obvious over prior art combining conventional inductor design with routine optimization. Nera failed to demonstrate unexpected technical effects or synergistic combinations. The PTAB analysis focused on the predictable nature of electromagnetic induction improvements and the availability of conventional design optimization techniques.

DLL Analysis: Wireless power transfer innovators must emphasize novel magnetic field geometries or coil configurations, efficiency gains exceeding conventional design expectations, improved foreign-object detection or thermal management, commercial success and industry adoption evidence, technical problems solved beyond user convenience. Claims should specify technical parameters (coupling coefficients, frequency ranges, power levels) demonstrating inventive design choices rather than routine optimization. Engineering applicants should prepare detailed declarations from RF engineers describing non-obvious technical solutions.

[Source]

German Court Grants Permanent Injunction Preventing Launch of Formycon's Biosimilar Aflibercept in 20 EU Countries

The Munich Regional Court delivered a landmark ruling in a patent infringement dispute between Regeneron/Bayer and Formycon concerning aflibercept, the active ingredient in Eylea (TM Registered), a leading biologic used in ophthalmology. Regeneron and Bayer, the originator patentees, alleged that Formycon's biosimilar infringed their core formulation and use patents covering VEGF-trap fusion proteins. Formycon maintained that its biosimilar employed distinct expression systems and molecular configurations, and that the asserted patents were invalid for lack of inventive step and insufficient disclosure.

After reviewing extensive expert evidence, the Court found that Formycon's product likely fell within the scope of Regeneron's patent claims and granted a permanent injunction restraining Formycon from launching its aflibercept biosimilar across nearly 20 European countries. The Court emphasized the binding effect of central patent rights under the European Patent Convention and coordinated injunction enforcement through parallel filings. The decision was widely reported as the first significant cross-border injunction in Europe's biosimilar sector under the post-UPC enforcement regime.

DLL Analysis: This judgment signals Europe's increasing willingness to extend cross-jurisdictional patent enforcement in biologics and demonstrates how originators can leverage coordinated filings to block multi-market biosimilar entry. For innovators, it underlines the value of strategically aligned patent families with harmonized claim drafting across EPC states, ensuring uniform protection during the biosimilar launch window. For biosimilar developers, it highlights the need for freedom-to-operate assessments that integrate both UPC and national-court exposure mapping. The case sets a template for parallel injunction coordination under the evolving Unified Patent Court ecosystem.

[Source]

Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court Local Division in The Hague issued on 22 October 2025

In this case, Abbott sought a preliminary injunction against Chinese medical-device company Sinocare for alleged infringement of its European patent covering continuous glucose-monitoring (CGM) technology. The dispute arose when Sinocare announced its plan to distribute a CGM sensor kit across several EU jurisdictions. Abbott claimed that the device's electrochemical detection interface and calibration algorithm fell squarely within its protected claims. Sinocare argued non-infringement, asserting significant technical deviations and the existence of pending validity challenges before the EPO. The UPC's Local Division in The Hague granted Abbott's motion for preliminary injunction, holding that the asserted patent was presumptively valid and that the infringement evidence was strong. The Court rejected Sinocare's plea for a stay pending opposition, noting the urgency of market entry and Abbott's risk of irreparable harm. This decision reinforced the UPC's readiness to grant swift, pan-European provisional relief within weeks of filing, even while EPO oppositions are pending.

DLL Analysis: The ruling illustrates the UPC's pro-enforcement stance and provides an early precedent for life-sciences companies considering the forum's power to obtain cross-border interim relief. Innovators should prepare UPC-ready enforcement playbooks with claim charts, expert declarations, and EPO coordination strategies. For generic and device challengers, the decision stresses the importance of early opposition filings and product-design differentiation to mitigate injunction risk. The case ultimately confirms that procedural agility and coordinated European counsel are now essential components of IP litigation strategy in medtech and diagnostics.

[Source]

Litigation Highlights & Practice Area

Delhi High Court Ratifies Mars-Cadbury Settlement in Long-Running "CELEBRATIONS" Trademark Case

After a 25-year feud over the 'CELEBRATIONS' trademark for confectionery, the Delhi High Court on Oct. 22, 2025, ratified an out-of-court settlement between Mars Inc. and Cadbury India. Each party agreed to cancel its marks and share goodwill in India. This amicable resolution (reported by NDTV) ended what was once India's longest-running trademark battle. For practitioners, this underscores that even entrenched IP wars can conclude by settlement. It is a reminder to advise clients on alternative dispute resolution: sometimes a co-existence or compromise deal preserves value and avoids protracted litigation.

DLL Analysis: This case is a masterclass of what strategic brand diplomacy means. After 25 years of litigation over "CELEBRATIONS," both confectionery giants effectively achieved an out of court settlement. The key takeaway would be that in certain situations structured settlements or coexistence agreements can preserve business relationships while maintaining market distinction.

[Source]

Delhi Court Grants Injunction to Tata's Vivanta Hotels Against 'Vivanta Stays'

On October 17, a Delhi court granted an ex-parte injunction preventing budget hotel chain "Vivanta Stays" from using the VIVANTA mark, following a plea by Tata's Vivanta Hotels. The judge recognized the senior VIVANTA brand's reputation in hospitality and found the budget brand likely to cause confusion. The case shows strong protection for well-known marks: brand owners should enforce early against look-alike entrants. This quick relief is a win for trademark holders in India, reaffirming that courts will police bad-faith or infringing marks promptly.

DLL Analysis: This ruling shows India's strong judicial stance on the protection of well-known trademarks where reputation and brand association are paramount. The Delhi court's swift ex-parte injunction signals that even seemingly minor infringements like adding a suffix or descriptive term won't dilute a famous mark's identity. For brand owners, the key takeaway is the value of proactive enforcement. Tata's early intervention ensured that "Vivanta Stays" couldn't trade on the goodwill or premium perception built around the "VIVANTA" name. Businesses should therefore monitor the market continuously and take immediate action against deceptive adaptations before they gain traction.

[Source]

Delhi Court Sides with Mattel, Stops Retailer from Using 'Barbie' in Branding

In early October, the Delhi High Court intervened in favor of Mattel, barring an Indian toy retailer from using "Barbie" in its business name or branding. Mattel argued the unauthorized use of its famous "Barbie" mark on websites and product pages was misleading. The court agreed, issuing an interim order preventing the infringer from further use. This highlights the strong grip of global brands in India: even without direct competition, the famous trademark doctrine lets rights-holders shut down confusing use. Practitioners should counsel local businesses that adding a famous mark to a new product or service name will likely invite immediate injunctions.

DLL Analysis: Strategically, rights-holders should note that maintaining active monitoring of online sellers, domain names and social media handles is vital in a digital economy where infringers often exploit trending marks for instant visibility. Conversely, small businesses must recognize that "borrowing" from pop culture icons like Barbie, even playfully, can swiftly invite injunctions and steep damages. This decision showcases that in India's IP landscape, fame is both an asset and a shield.

[Source]

Novartis AG & Anr v Lucius Pharmaceuticals & Ors (Xx v Yy, Delhi High Court, 6 October 2025)

Novartis AG filed a commercial suit under CS (COMM) 1067/2025 before the Delhi High Court seeking an ex parte ad interim injunction against Lucius Pharmaceuticals and associated distributors. The plaintiffs alleged infringement of Indian Patent No. 419280 protecting the compound Asciminib, a novel ABL1/BCR-ABL inhibitor used to treat Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia (CML). Investigations revealed that the defendants were marketing an infringing product, LuciASC, through online portals such as IndiaMART and WhatsApp channels, without any authorization. Novartis demonstrated purchase records and chemical comparison to establish prima facie infringement of its valid and subsisting patent rights. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora found that the infringing product contained the same compound protected under IN'280 and that the defendants' conduct, selling imported and locally distributed stock through unlicensed intermediaries, amounted to direct infringement. The Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction, restraining the defendants, their distributors, and associates from manufacturing, offering for sale, importing, or advertising any Asciminib formulations. The Court also allowed Novartis to seek delisting of infringing URLs from e-commerce platforms such as IndiaMART to prevent further dissemination.

DLL Analysis: This ruling reinforces the Delhi High Court's aggressive IP protection stance in the pharmaceutical sector, particularly against digital marketplace infringements. It demonstrates how forensic online evidence (WhatsApp chats, investigator reports, and product listings) can support ex parte injunctions. The order sets a precedent for patentees to integrate cyber-monitoring and digital enforcement protocols into their patent management strategy, ensuring faster response to unauthorized online sales and cross-border importation of patented APIs or formulations.

[Source]

Reckitt & Colman (Overseas) Hygiene Home Ltd v Ashok Kumar (John Does & Ors), Delhi High Court, October 9, 2025

Reckitt & Colman, part of the Reckitt Benckiser Group, filed a multi-brand IP enforcement suit concerning its flagship marks HARPIC, DETTOL, LIZOL, and COLIN, alleging large-scale counterfeiting and trade dress imitation. The defendants were operating a manufacturing unit under the name Hitran Industries, producing bottles and packaging nearly identical in shape, color combination, and cap design to the plaintiffs' registered products. YouTube videos and e-commerce listings showed the defendants selling lookalike packaging and offering counterfeit "DIY cleaner kits" to small-scale resellers, infringing multiple trademark and design registrations.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora found overwhelming visual similarity between the plaintiffs' registered designs and the defendants' products. The Court observed that the defendants' imitation extended beyond trademarks to distinctive trade dress and bottle configurations, qualifying as passing off and design infringement. An ex parte ad-interim injunction was granted, restraining the defendants from manufacturing or selling any deceptively similar bottles, and appointing local commissioners to seize infringing stock. The decision highlighted Reckitt's continuous use, extensive promotion, and market dominance in the hygiene product segment.

DLL Analysis: This judgment underlines a growing judicial focus on shape trademarks and trade dress protection in the FMCG sector. It signals that Indian courts are willing to treat product design and packaging as protectable identifiers of origin, even beyond word marks. For brand owners, this case stresses the importance of maintaining design registrations, shape mark filings, and social media vigilance to detect counterfeit marketing content. It also signals that digital evidence like YouTube listings can be pivotal in proving market misrepresentation and bad faith imitation.

[Source]

KBM Foods Pvt Ltd v Ajay Yadav (Trading as Sourav Masala Co.), Delhi High Court, October 17, 2025

KBM Foods, a legacy spice manufacturer since 1969, filed a suit against Ajay Yadav (trading as Sourav Masala Company) for trademark infringement and passing off of its well-known marks KBM, GAI CHAAP, and associated COW device mark. The defendant was found manufacturing and distributing spices under confusingly similar marks "KDM" and "GAU CHAAP", along with near-identical packaging and label design. KBM produced investigation reports showing unauthorized manufacture and sale of infringing goods from a Gurugram facility, supported by photographic evidence and undercover purchases made through digital payments.

Justice Tejas Karia recognized that the defendant's adoption of the impugned marks and trade dress was dishonest and deliberate, aimed at misleading consumers and capitalizing on KBM's long-standing goodwill. The Court found that the impugned marks replicated essential visual and phonetic elements of the plaintiff's label, establishing a clear case of infringement under Sections 29(1) and 29(2) of the Trade-Marks Act. An interim injunction was granted, restraining the defendant from manufacturing or marketing any products under the infringing marks, both offline and via e-commerce channels.

DLL Analysis: The decision reiterates that brand heritage and consumer association built over decades hold strong evidentiary weight in injunction proceedings. The Delhi High Court continues to treat family marks and trade dress of traditional FMCG brands as vital components of commercial identity. This case highlights the court's willingness to apply classic trademark principles to modern online trade violations, emphasizing proactive brand monitoring and forensic investigation to establish prima facie infringement in the digital marketplace.

[Source]

Causam Enterprises, Inc. v. ITC (Smart Grid & Demand Response Technology)

Causam Enterprises owns patents related to demand response technology-electrical systems that dynamically reduce power consumption in response to grid conditions-a critical component of smart grid infrastructure. Causam filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission (ITC) alleging patent infringement by foreign competitors. The Federal Circuit addressed issues of patent ownership, validity, and infringement scope in this appeal, ultimately affirming the ITC's determination that Causam demonstrated a viable claim.

DLL Analysis: The decision reinforces the ITC's role as a critical venue for enforcing engineering patents in technology sectors involving imported electronics and smart-grid components. Engineering companies should integrate ITC enforcement strategies into broader IP protection plans, particularly for technologies embodied in imported electrical systems, control hardware, and network-integrated devices.

[Source]

Brita LP v. ITC (Gravity-Fed Water Filtration Systems)

Brita LP held a patent for a gravity-fed water filtration system designed to remove contaminants using activated carbon and lead-scavenging media. The Federal Circuit reviewed an ITC determination concerning mechanical design patentability and infringement scope in this consumer mechanical engineering dispute.

DLL Analysis: This case illustrates the expanding scope of ITC jurisdiction into consumer mechanical devices. Engineering companies developing filtration systems, fluid control devices, and consumer appliance technologies should ensure robust claim differentiation, detailed mechanical drawings, and freedom-to-operate analyses to withstand ITC scrutiny and avoid unexpected infringement exposure.

[Source]

In Re X-Fab Semiconductor Foundries Gmbh (Semiconductor Manufacturing Processes)

X-Fab Semiconductor Foundries appealed a PTAB decision affirming an examiner's rejection of claims directed to carrier substrates used in semiconductor component manufacturing. The claimed invention involved novel active regions and trench isolation structures formed by local oxidation techniques. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's obviousness rejection, noting that X-Fab forfeited its substantive arguments on appeal through insufficient briefing.

This case underscores the procedural importance of preserving arguments before the PTAB and Federal Circuit. Semiconductor and electronics applicants must ensure that all substantive positions are clearly articulated during examination and appeal to avoid forfeiture. Additionally, the decision reinforces the high bar for patentability of incremental process improvements in semiconductor manufacturing-practitioners should focus on novel process steps, integration techniques, or unexpected yield/performance benefits rather than routine design modifications.

[Source]

Transactional IP

Novartis-Avidity Biosciences Deal

Novartis's $12 billion acquisition of Avidity Biosciences marked one of the largest RNA-therapy transactions of 2025, giving the Swiss pharma control over Avidity's proprietary Antibody-Oligonucleotide Conjugate (AOC) platform. The move strengthens Novartis's position in neuromuscular and genetic disease therapeutics while adding a broad patent estate covering oligonucleotide delivery mechanisms and conjugate chemistry. The transaction underscores the shift toward platform-based IP consolidation as big pharma seeks durable exclusivity in RNA-modality pipelines.

[Source]

Eli Lilly to Acquire Adverum Biotechnologies

Eli Lilly announced the acquisition of Adverum Biotechnologies, a California-based gene-therapy company developing intravitreal AAV-based treatments for ocular disorders. The deal enhances Lilly's ophthalmic and gene-therapy IP portfolio, integrating Adverum's vector-engineering technology and licensed patents for long-acting anti-VEGF delivery. Strategically, the acquisition broadens Lilly's reach into precision ocular medicine while reinforcing control over emerging biologic delivery IP relevant to next-generation retinal therapies.

[Source]

Life-Sciences Firms Opt for Spin-Off and Split-Off IP Structures

A Reuters analysis reported a growing preference among global life-sciences companies for spin-off and split-off transactions to monetise non-core IP assets while preserving core research pipelines. This structure enables firms to unlock investor value without surrendering high-value patents or licenses tied to their lead candidates. The approach reflects an evolving corporate-IP strategy where separation of discovery platforms and mature assets allows targeted capital raising, improved licensing flexibility, and protection of core proprietary data.

[Source]

ams OSRAM and Nichia sign broad patent cross-license agreement

ams OSRAM and Nichia signed a comprehensive cross-license covering thousands of patents in nitride LEDs, laser components, and, for the first time, LED packages/modules (e.g., automotive matrix headlamps), expanding mutual access and customer IP safety in optoelectronics.

[Source]

Technology & IP Convergence

AI-Driven Pharma R&D and Supply-Chain Digitisation: AI continued to redefine pharmaceutical innovation during October 2025, with companies integrating machine-learning-based molecule prediction, lab automation, and data-linked supply-chain systems. The industry's focus shifted from experimental AI pilots to end-to-end IP-linked automation, where algorithmic outputs, ranging from compound libraries to process analytics that are being captured as protectable inventions. This convergence signals that ownership of AI-generated chemical data, training sets, and model-output reproducibility will soon become a core IP battleground in digital pharma ecosystems.

[Source]

Adobe-Google Cloud AI Partnership: Adobe and Google Cloud recently extended their strategic alliance to boost creative AI services. Google's AI models and its new Gemini Ultra backbone will power Adobe's creative tools Firefly via the Google Cloud ecosystem. For IP matters, this means more content generated by AI services will flow between platforms. The partnership also signals that tech/IP teams should monitor how joint ventures might affect content ownership and data usage between such global players.

[Source]

DLA Piper Biotech-Medtech Industry Bootcamp: Global law firm DLA Piper hosted its annual Biotech & Medtech Bootcamp in October 2025, focusing on IP strategy, commercialization pathways, and regulatory compliance for growth-stage health-tech companies. Sessions explored AI-integrated diagnostics, wearable biomedical devices, and cross-jurisdictional IP protection for digital-health innovations. The event reflected an evolving convergence between legal, technological, and clinical disciplines, highlighting how early-stage companies can use strategic IP positioning to accelerate capital access and partnership readiness in the med-tech innovation cycle.

[Source]

AI-Driven Semiconductor Manufacturing: Samsung and NVIDIA's AI Factory (October 31, 2025): Samsung Electronics and NVIDIA announced the construction of a new AI factory combining Samsung's semiconductor technologies with NVIDIA platforms. The facility will deploy over 50,000 NVIDIA GPUs to power AI-driven semiconductor chip manufacturing. Samsung is accelerating its optical proximity correction (OPC) lithography platform with NVIDIA CUDA GPU-accelerated infrastructure, achieving 20x performance gains in computational lithography and technology computer-aided design (TCAD) simulations. The collaboration integrates digital twins using NVIDIA Omniverse for global fabs to enable AI-driven predictive maintenance, operational optimization, and autonomous fab environments. This represents the convergence of classical semiconductor process control with advanced AI systems-creating new patentable innovations in AI-assisted manufacturing algorithms, predictive maintenance systems, and fab automation architectures.

[Source]

Biotech Buzz

AI-Driven Drug Discovery Partnership: Nabla Bio & Takeda Pharmaceutical Company

U.S. biotech Nabla Bio announced a multi-year research partnership with Takeda Pharmaceutical, leveraging Nabla's proprietary AI platform (JAM) to design protein-based therapeutics for challenging biologic targets. The agreement includes upfront payments in the double-digit millions and over USD 1 billion in potential success-based milestones. The collaboration is focused on rapid in-silico design of custom biologics with an expected turnaround of 3-4 weeks from design to lab testing.

DLL Analysis: This deal highlights how the biotech frontier is shifting from classic wet‐lab chemistry toward algorithm-driven biologics engineering, making AI platforms a central IP asset in their own right. For biotech companies this means that patent strategies should not only cover molecules and processes but must now include AI model architecture, training data sets, and algorithmic output workflows. Moreover, pharma-biotech alliances increasingly resemble tech-platform transactions, suggesting that firms with strong AI-bio convergence will command premium valuations and negotiating leverage.

[Source]

Lab Market Transformation via AI in Life Sciences Real-Estate

A market-analysis release by JLL (Global real-estate services firm) documented that U.S. life-sciences lab space is entering an inflection point, driven by oversupply and demand shifts, with AI and automation cited as key drivers of change. The report noted that 61 million sq ft of lab space is available and that AI-enabled platforms are reshaping how biotech firms design and operate R&D infrastructure.

DLL Analysis: While this may appear a real-estate story, its IP implications are significant: as biotech firms adopt AI-enabled lab automation, the associated software, sensor networks, and data pipelines become protectable assets alongside traditional molecules. The convergence of infrastructure and IP means that early-mover biotech companies can generate patentable process innovations in lab-execution, data capture, and automation control. It suggests that IP strategies must now factor in facility-level patenting (automation workflows) and should track supply-chain/IP interplay in R&D operations.

[Source]

Innovation Spotlight

Intel's 18A Process Technology Enters Production at Fab 52 (October 9, 2025)

Intel announced that its Fab 52 facility in Chandler, Arizona, commenced production using Intel's cutting-edge 18A process technology after four years of development. The process delivers 50% performance improvement over the previous generation using advanced extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography and next-generation chip packaging. Panther Lake laptop processors built on 18A employ a "system-on-chip" design consolidating graphics and processing units, demonstrating convergence of advanced transistor physics with integrated chiplet architectures.

IP Implication: The convergence of node advancement with system-architecture innovation creates patent opportunities spanning 3D packaging, power-delivery systems, and integrated chiplet architectures optimized for heterogeneous computing.

[Source]

Absci Corp Accelerates Generative-AI Biologics

Absci announced its AI-driven platform for biologics design (Integrated Drug Creation (Trademark Pending)) will move into advanced therapeutic candidates with unprecedented speed and fidelity.

IP Implication: As AI-designed antibodies and biologics become commercially viable, IP strategy must pivot from just molecule patents to include algorithmic scaffolds, sequence generation methods, and data pipeline protection, changing how invention and inventorship are defined in biotech.

[Source]

Filing Trends

• USPTO AI Pilot for Applicants (USA): The USPTO's new ASAP! (AI Search Automated Pilot) Program, provides applicants with an AI-generated "top 10" prior-art list before examination. Under ASAP!, an internal AI tool scans the pending application and classification to suggest prior art, giving the applicant an early heads-up, AI-Assisted Search Results Notice. This allows applicants to amend claims or gather arguments preemptively. [Source]

• AI represents the fastest-growing segment within patent filing: The global AI patent filing continue to trend, coinciding with the emergence of foundational AI models like GPT-3.

• Evolving Patent Landscape in Australia's Life Sciences Sector: Patent filings in Australia's life-sciences segment show a moderate decline in pharmaceuticals and medical-technology applications in 2024, with biotech filings holding steadier that highlighting shifting priorities in filing strategies. [Source]

IP in the Wild - Pop Culture & Business

Celebrity Branding: Cole Palmer's "Cold Palmer" (UK) - In early October 2025, Chelsea footballer Cole Palmer registered a UK trademark for "Cold Palmer," his well-known nickname. Palmer's swift action shows how athletes are building personal brands and blocking unauthorized merch. The brand "Cold Palmer" for clothing/footwear helps him monetize his persona beyond the pitch. For businesses, this highlights the importance of athletes and influencers proactively filing marks for fan mottos and memes.

DLL Analysis: Cole Palmer's decision to trademark "Cold Palmer" is a smart example of how modern athletes are turning their public image into a business asset. By protecting his popular nickname, Palmer is not only safeguarding his identity but also creating opportunities to monetize his brand beyond football. This move highlights a broader trend of athletes taking control of their personal branding and intellectual property, ensuring that fan-created phrases and nicknames remain under their ownership. It's a reminder that in today's sports and entertainment landscape, personal branding is as strategic and valuable as performance on the field.

[Source]

"Chandni Bar Returns" - Makers react as Madhur Bhandarkar files complaint against sequel title

Veteran filmmaker Madhur Bhandarkar filed a formal complaint in October 2025, alleging unauthorized use of his film title "Chandni Bar Returns" by another production team. The Indian Motion Picture Producers' Association (IMPPA) issued an advisory warning producers against sequel or spin-off titles that exploit successful franchises without proper rights assignment. The complaint reignited debate over moral rights and the limited protection offered by title registration within industry guilds.

DLL Analysis: The dispute underscores the persistent gap between moral authorship and enforceable IP rights in India's film industry. Without trademark protection, even celebrated titles risk appropriation. It highlights the need for producers to secure dual protection, contractual assignments and trademark filings such as to safeguard film franchises. The case may encourage guilds and the Film Chamber to establish clearer frameworks linking creative attribution to registrable rights.

[Source]

No relief on plea of copyright violation against filmmaker

The Bombay High Court declined to grant interim relief to petitioners claiming copyright infringement over the title "Punha Shivaji Raje Bhosale", holding that historic names and figures fall within the public domain. The court reasoned that such names, when used respectfully, cannot constitute exclusive property of any one producer or writer.

DLL Analysis: The judgment reiterates that cultural and historical references remain public heritage unless creatively transformed into distinctive marks. This limits attempts to monopolize iconic national or mythological figures under copyright law. For content creators, it is a reminder to craft original narratives or characters and rely on trademark-based distinctiveness rather than asserting ownership over cultural terminology.

[Source]

Samsung Ordered to Pay $445.5 Million for Wireless Communications Patent Infringement

A federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas ruled that Samsung Electronics must pay $445.5 million in damages to Collision Communications, Inc. after finding the company willfully infringed four patents related to wireless communication technology. The patents cover methods for mitigating interference and improving efficiency of multi-user radio transmissions used in 4G, 5G, and Wi-Fi systems. Samsung's Galaxy smartphones, tablets, and laptops incorporate the patented MIMO (multiple-input, multiple-output) signal-processing techniques without license. Judge Rodney Gilstrap presided over the case in Marshall, Texas.

DLL Analysis: This landmark verdict represents one of the largest patent infringement awards issued in recent years from the Eastern District of Texas a court well-known for complex technology and IP disputes. The willful infringement finding may lead to enhanced damages. The case underscores the vulnerability of semiconductor and wireless manufacturers to patent infringement liability when integrating communications technologies into products without comprehensive freedom-to-operate analyses. Engineering companies must ensure licensed access to SEPs covering 5G and Wi-Fi standards.

[Source]

Quick Wins & Resources

Must Read:

• Hot Topics: Life Sciences: An article summarising key focus areas including the UK's fall in pharma investment ranking and how IP risk is increasingly a priority for life sciences investors in the U.S. and beyond. Clean, concise update that can inform client briefings. [Source]

• PTAB/USPTO Update: A detailed review of recent USPTO operational and regulatory updates, including closures, new director appointments and patent electronic-system changes. Practical for anticipating procedural risk in IP filings. [Source]

Upcoming Events

• IP & Innovation Conclave 2025: November 14, 2025, Mumbai (regional hub event on IP and new-age tech) [Source]
• International Conference on Role of IPR at IIT Bombay: November 26–28, 2025 (academic and policy focus) [Source]
• 69th Annual Intellectual Property, Information & Privacy Law Conference: November 7, 2025, Chicago (hybrid event on patents, privacy, cybersecurity, and AI regulation) [Source]
• IP in Entertainment and Media Conference: November 6, 2025, Santa Monica, CA (focused on IP issues in media, entertainment, and digital content) [Source]
• AI & IP Summit Europe 2025: November 11, 2025, London (explores intersection of artificial intelligence, innovation, and IP rights) [Source]
• IP+ Conference 2025: November 14, 2025, Cleveland (academic and industry dialogue on IP strategy, medtech, and commercialization) [Source]
• IP Service World 2025: November 24–25, 2025, Munich (Europe's largest IP convention and trade fair featuring law firms, service providers, and IP tech) [Source]
• AIPLA 2025 Annual Meeting (USA): Oct. 30–Nov. 1, 2025 (Washington, DC). Key IP meeting with CLE programs on patents, trademarks, and litigation. [Source]
• US Chamber IP Champions Reception: Nov. 18, 2025 (Washington, DC). Evening event honoring IP advocates. [Source]

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.