If you've come up with a creative approach to accomplishing anything or the latest innovative desirable outcome, you're entitled to a patent, which grants you a unique privilege to use your innovation. Obtaining a patent requires the disclosure of detailed particulars concerning innovation in a patent filing.

A utility patent is a unique right issued for an innovation that enables the registered proprietor to prohibit everyone else from commercial applications utilizing patented innovation without his permission for a set number of years. Petty patents, innovation patents, minor patents, as well as small patents are all terms used to describe these types of patent applications.

However, just a few nations worldwide provide utility patents; they include China, Brazil, Japan, Italy, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States of America. India is not one of these nations.

The United States Patent & Trademarks Department (USPTO) would grant utility patents to all of the innovators in this category.

The intellectual property office will issue a patent for innovation based on the invention's integrity and regardless or not the innovation has previously been patented.

The creator is granted a utility patent, which grants him or her the exclusive authority to forbid everyone else from creating, trying to sell, or engaging in several other economic operations without his / her permission.

Obtaining a utility patent would safeguard the invention's entire framework as well as its numerous purposes. Because of this, then there will be no unauthorized or cloned rendition of the innovation, despite when it appears to be identical.

Introduction
When a new or better invention, technique, or equipment is created, a utility patent is issued to protect it. People and businesses cannot make, use, or sell the idea without permission if they have a utility patent (often called a "patent for innovation"). Generally, people use the term "patent" to relate to utility patents, being the most common type of patent.

The exclusive economic rights that utility patents grant innovators to produce and apply cutting-edge technologies make them extremely significant. Utility patents, on the other hand, are extremely challenging to get. As a result, they can be expensive in terms of time and money-consuming to produce, and their intricacy can also end up making it tough to comprehend.

U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) issues utility patents, which are valid for up to Twenty yrs. The patent owner, on the other hand, may be required to pay service costs over this span of time.

Use the USPTO's patent searching facility if you wish to see if your idea has previously been patented. It is up to the creator to prevent people from actually making, exploiting, or distributing their innovation when a utility patent is awarded.

There are 3 essential requirements to get a utility Patent:

1. Novelty:
   You have to be new. It means you have to be the first and it should be original. But it also means if you publish something more than a year before you apply, you can't get a patent. There's limited time for applying for a patent.
2. Utility:
   It means, it has to be useful. Useful means to the public. It means practical.
3. Non-Obviousness:
   Could there be a proxy for brilliance. There's more to it, there are more criteria, and it is complex gradually.

Novelty

It means, were you first? Is it New? Is it a new invention? Are you the Creator?

Basically, it is being the first and being new. The general idea is, you can't get a patent if you have already disclosed the invention if you have already shared it with the public if you have already used it. Therefore, an invention cannot be patented if its already public information.

Novelty Requirements:
Not patentable if one of the following happened before the applicant filed for the patent protection:

• Known to public/ used in product
• Described in publication / online
• Described in a patent application

There is a 1 year grace period from the first public disclosure. If you don't file within that 1 year, you'll lose all rights to obtain a patent. And nobody else can also patent. Because it becomes a public domain. That one year stops when you file your patent application. The provisional patent stops the clock on this one year. The grace period of one year applies in the USA and it applies in most other countries throughout Europe, Japan, Korea, China, Australia, New Zealand, India, etc.

There are few countries that provide a shorter grace period. They want to encourage you to be quick to file in their Country. It is generally preferable to file a patent application within 3 months of disclosure.

Novelty is important because governments want publication. That's the deal they made years ago when patents were created. It says if you publish your invention in the public to see, for the competitors to see, they will give protection for 20 years. That's the limited Monopoly of a patent in trade for publication.

On the whole, the purpose of Novelty requirements is to prevent prior art from being patented.

Utility

It is even easier but deadlier too.

The utility is, why it is useful?
It's not the only kind of patent, but it's the most useful kind of patent. It's the most money that you can make from having a patent. It's the best protection of a patent, and it's a patent that requires usefulness.

Most state utility:

• Most state some way in which product or process is useful in application.
• Burden is generally on PTO to show that innovation is not useful.
• But if you don't state a utility that is grounds for immediate dismissal of your patents.

Stated utility need not be the only useful application

• Drugs often patented for one use and used for other.

E.g., You may get a patent on a drug, a chemical formulation, that helps to cure a rare form of cancer, but they start to grow hair on their head. So, it turns out that this drug can help cure rare cancer and baldness. Therefore, you still have a Monopoly on that chemical formulation. You got that drug patented. It doesn't matter that the application you're using it for is not at all the one you applied for in the patent.

All you have to do to get a patent is state some useful application. If there are other applications are present is great. So, you can't extrapolate processes as well as you can produce. But a product, which is a chemical formulation or specific device, if you get a patent on that can easily be used in another application.

Demonstrating Utility:
The best way to show utility is sales. A product with commercial sales is clearly useful. If sales grow fast, evidence (but not proof) of utility, the government can still say you have committed fraud.' 'It's better to file applications and then start commercial sales. You still get to show that utility via sales because it will probably take 3 yrs. to get your application. Most importantly, it must be useful to society.

Therefore, Utility is only required for utility patents. Because they're granted as a matter of public policy for useful arts. You must clearly state why it's useful and also useful to the public, not useful to a researcher in the lab. Hence, benefit publicly and not personally.

Non-Obviousness

Hardest of the three elements of patenting.
The product filed for patenting must be non - obvious to someone skilled in related fields. Now, the obviousness factor is viewed from the perspective of an industry expert. Now, the general rule in addition to being non - obviousness, is it has to represent some significant advance over the prior state of the art. Obviousness is viewed from the perspective of Industry experts, and not from layman review.

Demonstrating of Non-Obviousness:

• Most of the effort in the patent application goes here. Because this is the hardest thing to show.
• Detailed analysis of the business process or engineering applications.
• An extensive survey of prior art (existing invention).

Utility Patents In India

Indian enterprises and start-ups wishing to obtain utility patent cover must submit their applications to one of the nations listed above because India does not provide such status. India, like the rest of the world, needs utility patent rights due to the various advantages.' 'Because they don't have the money to undertake testing and examinations or to incur costly patent charges, SMBs gain from utility-patent protections because they lacked the resources.

Well over 48,000,000 small & medium enterprises (SMEs) operate in India and engage vast numbers of people, according to one assessment. Small and medium-sized enterprises that don't have the resources to defend their innovations may benefit from utility patent protection.

It has been found that utility patents are an efficient way to safeguard ideas from MSMEs. The govt's 'Made in India' strategy is encouraging MSMEs to build their businesses, and this might help them do so even more.

With this sort of patent, preparing and prosecuting the petition before such a patent office is by far the most significant aspect, which necessitates considerable competence.

Neither 2 tier patent mechanism exists in India currently. A large portion of the Country's gross domestic product comes from small and medium-sized businesses. The country's financial system relies heavily on the nation's unorganized sector, which has demonstrated significant advances in effectiveness over the period.

Many innovation-based initiatives are also carried out by the unorganized sector, although they do not always roll out R&D for it and operate within restrictions. Most of these innovations are cumulative, which indicates that the new technology is a modification or enhancement to pre-existing technology.

There is no originality in their creations. Because of these factors, it is tough for them to obtain patent rights for their innovations, and their creations are unable to match with those of large corporations. As a result, no one can see what they've created. However, India's current patent laws appear to exclusively benefit the nation's official sector, rather than the nation's unorganized sector. A lack of access to patent protection in the informal economy continues to hamper its ability to innovate effectively.

So, it is vital to develop a 2 tier patent system and to recognize how inventions in the unorganized sector differ from those in the mainstream. As the author explains in "The Shadow Economy: Invention, Ip Rights & Regulatory Concerns," the unorganized sector consists of "firms as well as businessmen who've had rudimentary technology as well as minimal resources. In the unorganized sector, rip-offs and alterations to existing technology predominate over the creation of new ones.

The advances in the unorganized sector are built on accumulated learning, and research has shown that groups instead of individuals are the driving force behind these new ideas." India's government launched the National Innovation Foundation in 2000 as a way to stimulate and support indigenous creativity. The purpose of this was to create an organization that would assist grassroots creation & growth, particularly for individuals and the general public, to thrive in the area of research and advancement.

In addition to providing financial support, this basis also serves as a source of inspiration for new initiatives in the community. Although this platform encourages new ideas, it is not doing much to safeguard them. As a result, a secondary mechanism is required to make patents more readily available to the general public.

Requirement for Utility patent in India
An innovation, according to the Patents Act of 1970, is any fresh material or technique that has distinctiveness, creative breakthrough, and can be used in industry. S. 2 (1) (ac) of the Patents Act, 1970, expressly defines "compatible of industrial uses" as what is created and applied in industry.' As a result, it is analogous to the European Patent Convention's "susceptibility to industrial applications" condition.

In the case of Indian Vacuum brake Co., Ltd. v. E.S. Luard (1925)[1], the Calcutta High Court ruled in this instance that the phrase "utility" is being used in a specific manner within patent law and that is not meant to be taken in a broad context. Therefore, a patent cannot be granted only on the basis of its utility.

Utility was characterized as an innovation greater than that of the existing understanding of the field about the precise thing in Young and Neilson v. Rosenthal and Co. (1884).

In the case of Cipla Ltd. v. F. Hoffmann - La Roche Ltd. & Anr. (2015)[2]. The terms of "invention" as well as "capable of industrial application" under the Act stipulated that innovation should have commercial utility or embodiment. Although an innovation might not yet be ready for market, it can still be intellectual it might have some economic potential. Because the direct body element formed has an economic perspective, rather than a commodity, this is the center of concern.
Benefits of Utility Patent in India

Day after day, big number of new start-up firms are registering in India. These start-ups often offer routine solutions in an unconventional manner. These methods might well be novel, but they don't meet the patentability requirements. The utility model notion may be the most applicable intellectual property right in these instances.

It's disappointing that Indian enterprises and start-ups with unique conceptual frameworks are unable to pursue patent immunity owing to the absence of the utility model regime in India. As a result, these organizations are frequently confronted with a surge in competitiveness, unfair trade practices, economic decline, etc. as a result.

Some start-ups from India want to function in nations that have more extensive intellectual property (IP) rights. In a growing nation like India, the Small & Medium Enterprises (SMEs), as well as MSMEs, have a vital role. Small and medium-sized enterprises might gain from utility model ownership because they typically lack the finances to undertake testing & experiments as well as afford costly patent costs.

Utility Model Patent In China

Chinese patent laws are not distinctive because utility model patent applications are granted in many nations. In contrast, the utility model patent in China has drawn far more emphasis & prompted serious concerns because of its widespread adoption in the country.

Nearly all utility model patent rights registered in China this year were issued by Local candidates, with moreover 1.6 million proposals submitted in 2017. In 2017, utility model patents accumulated over 3.5 million. For the first time, a non-official information resource has estimated the number of first-instance patent infringement lawsuit cases depending on utility model patents in China in 2016. This proves that utility model patents are now being used in the marketplace.

What do Utility patents in China govern?
A utility model patent can be secured for a material thing, but not as a technique or a concoction of matter since it pertains to the geometry or design of the commodity or the conjunction of that structure & aspect. In addition, the new technological approach must be useful. Electronic circuits are not patentable as a standalone item, but as a component of another item, they may be eligible for registration.

What innovations will not be covered in China?
There are many different types of approaches as well as procedures, however, the most common are those that do not have a clear structure or configuration, those that were modified by substituting a different material or changing the production methodology, and those that still have a two-dimensional design concept without tackling a technical glitch.

Notable exceptions to the patentability rule include computer programs, innovations that violate state rules or ethical norms, innovations that are harmful to the public good, new advances, mental activity regulations & procedures, diagnostic or therapeutic processes, living creature or plant variants, and chemical compounds created through nuclear fusion.

Requirements for Registration
To register a utility model patent rights as well as an innovation patent application for an innovation simultaneously at the same time, both should be issued on the very same day, and that each should include an acknowledgment of both of these applications' existence. It is mandatory for the candidate to give up the utility model patent after the innovation patent has been issued since the candidate could only hold one patent for a similar idea in China at any given time.

There is a 10-year limit on the utility model patent's period of protection. It is possible for the utility model patent to act as a kind of protection for the financial preferences of the claimant, while the lengthier 20-year innovation patent is proceeding. Nevertheless, there is indeed a hurdle for individuals who apply for PCTs. To secure patent protection in China depending on a PCT patent filing, a claimant should select perhaps an innovation or utility model patent application when entering the national sector, but never both, at the moment of national phase entrance.

Invention patents, utility model patents, & design patents are all forms of patents in China. As in the United States, a novel technological approach to an item, method, or enhancement that such can be protected by an invention patent in China. This is not the case with a Chinese utility model patent, which only protects novel technological solutions related to the design or composition of a property.

While patents that have a Ten yr. duration isn't significantly evaluated, they do undergo a statutory inspection that typically spans between 1 - 1.5 yrs. If you are looking for anything with a Twenty year term like a patent for an innovation, you will need a thorough examination that could require from 3 - 5 yrs. for completion.

If a claimant wants to take the opportunity of the quick issuing of the utility model patent, he/she should register for both utility model applications as well as a patent filing. In contrast, most international candidates fail to take advantage of this approach. In 2008, 99.3 percent (223,945) of utility model petitions were issued by China candidates, as per SIPO figures. About 1,641 utility model submissions were submitted by outside candidates (0.7 percent ).

And there is no new here. Just 0.3% of utility model applications were submitted by non -Chinese parties from 1985, with the Locals submitting 99.7 percent of all such requests. One factor for this may be those international candidates, especially many from nations that no utility model prevails, are unaware of understanding Chinese utility models.

Grounds for consideration of the Patent
As a general rule, utility model patents are often less costly & awarded more rapidly than inventive patents, often between six to twelve months of application submission

• In certain cases, the device getting patented is of a sort which doesn't need longer over what the ten-year duration of rights granted by a utility model patent.
• For this reason, the utility model patent gives a foundation for taking action towards breaches much sooner than is the scenario with an inventive patent. Violators may act swiftly to replicate the technology, and therefore the utility model patent forms a framework for taking action over defaulters much faster.
• Evidence dependant type of Jurisprudence is the norm in China. In order to prove that a privilege getting stated is invalid, this involves the use of records. When it comes to a claim to a utility model patent, it might yet require a great amount of time & exertion to gather reasonable grounds to believe that the invention is invalid.
• This patent violation case of Chint v. Schneider in 2007 was extensively publicized since it featured the biggest patent penalties compensation given by a Chinese court to an infringing Chinese corporation against a non - Chinese infringing organization. According to a China utility model patent, this issue never was reported publicly during the period.

Utility Patents In The U.S

'Original as well as valuable processes, machines, manufacturing, or compositions of material can be granted patents for up to 20 years, according to the deposit of management charges. Utilities, also known as "patents for innovation," account for the vast majority (90%) of all USPTO patent papers granted in recent times.'[3]

'Utility patent is defined as the innovation for which a patent can be sought under Title 35, Part II, Chapter 10, sub. sec 101 of the U.S. Law. Anyone who comes up with a unique, as well as beneficial procedure, machine or manufacturing method, can apply for a patent, as long as they meet the terms & criteria of this Ordinance.'[4]

'For approximately Twenty yrs., the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) issues utility patents. There are certain exceptions for up to 5 yrs. which are available for drugs, medical devices, etc. It is possible that the patent owner will be required to spend management costs during that timeframe.'[5] 'A utility patent gives innovators the power to block everyone else from making, utilizing, or trading such inventions after they have been granted a patent.'[6]

To begin the process of securing a utility patent, most people turn to the services of a patent attorney/agent. They can help inventors navigate the intricacies of utility patent applications. The second stage is to hire a patent design illustrator. It's possible to create a file system once all the components have been collected together. Registration fees could vary from 1000 dollars to 10,000 dollars, based on the intricacy of the innovation.

Provisional & non-provisional utility patent filings can be submitted. The second is a relatively prevalent use case for this technique. The provisional patent filing leveled the playing field for American and international patent seekers alike. Non - USA candidates might extend the 20-year patent validity by one year by initially issuing an appeal in their native land and afterward issuing their U.S. petition w/o provisional patent petition. For an additional year, they might acquire a royalty on their innovation by declaring primacy in their own nation. In the USA, provisional patent applications provide candidates having similar benefits by extending the patent "pending" period by one year.

Article 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) definition of "new" states that creation should not have been previously acknowledged or utilized within that nation or registered or published in any source. If the innovation has already been registered or is shared with the public, the creator cannot be granted a patent. 1 yr. is the typical wait time between the moment of creation and filing for a patent in most countries. It is possible for the holding period to begin rolling as quickly as the innovation is made public to others despite the guarantee of secrecy.

Utility Patents Regulations In Other Countries

Australian Legislation
One of several nations that granted an Innovations Patent (Utility Model Coverage) security for approximately eight yrs. was Australia. The Innovation Patent has a minimal barrier criterion for ingenuity and can basically give significant security for innovations that might alternatively not fulfill the greater creativity standards.' 'The Innovation Patent System provides security for nearly all types of subject material that may be protected there under the Australian Standard Patent System.

Yet, the Federal Government has lately declared tearing off from the creative (utility model) patenting structure. The Government of Australia is of the belief that most of the small & medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that engage the present innovation patent structure would not gain benefit from this, and consequently, the system levies large expenses on 3rd parties and the greater Australian society.

European Union Legislation
Unlike patents, utility model protections in Europe do not have a universal treaty that allows them to be protected in other jurisdictions. Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic Denmark, Estonia, Finland France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, as well as Spain are among countries where this can be acquired.

The United Kingdom does not presently have a utility model regime in place.

German Legislation
According to the German Regime, a utility model is an IPR. German utility models are only enforced in Germany, and not outside of the European Union. The German Patent & Trademark Office registers utility models. Nominations for these patents can be made explicitly or taken from existing German, European, or PCT patents.

Ten years of insurance are provided under the German utility model, which may be filed between six-ten weeks of application. To make use of both quick narrow security (utility models) and greater lengthy security (patents), a firm or person could in Germany apply for a patent as well as a utility model for the given particular subject.

Japanese Legislation
"A device that pertains to the shape or structure of a product" that is "industrially relevant" is protected by the Japanese Utility Model Act (JUMA). The lifespan of a Japanese utility model is ten yrs.

Utility Patents In International Conventions

Paris Conventions

According to the Paris Convention, utility models are classified as Intellectual Property rights internationally. In terms of meaning & classification, meanwhile, the Convention remains mute and only states that utility models are afforded the universal norms of general agreement as well as entitlement to primacy.

Consequently, A.1(2) specifies that: - The prevention of industrial property includes patents, utility models, industrial designs, trademarks, service marks, generic versions, and indicators of sources/origination.

TRIPS
WTO signatory nations are permitted to develop or refuse tier-2 safety systems as they deem appropriate under the TRIPS Agreement, which defines basic criteria for all of the primary IPR regimes. Although the TRIPS Agreement does not specifically include utility model coverage, it is possible that the Paris Convention rules (particularly A.1(2)) are applicable to all WTO nations by regard to A.2(1) of the TRIPS Agreement. However, this will not necessitate WTO delegates or Convention member nations to implement utility model rules.

PCT
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is yet another key treaty that facilitates patent portfolio in more than around jurisdiction. The pact promotes patentees to seek relief over a wider territorial area by making the system easier and cheaper. National patent offices can accept a unified petition rather than submitting multiple applications in every country in which security is sought.

This allows them to indicate all the nations where security is also requested. To perform a prior art investigation, the statement of claim is sent to 1 among 9 International Search Authorities (ISAs). Then it will be left towards the patent offices of the specified jurisdictions to grant the patent.

The PCT facilitates worldwide patent protection for utility models here too, making it easier for inventors to secure global recognition. "application" is defined in Article 2 of the PCT as an application for the safeguard of a creation; sources to an "application" would then be regarded as descriptions to applications for patents for creations, innovators' credentials, utility accreditations, utility models, patents or credentials of addition, inventors' certificates of addition, and utility certificates of addition.

As a result, worldwide patent claims can be made for both conventional as well as tier - 2 patents.

Conclusion
An important benefit of patent law is the shielding of utility models, which may be particularly useful in growing nations like India. A utility model could become a valuable asset on its own or in conjunction with a patent application. An estimated 48 million small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operate in India, generating work for crores of citizens.

Due to the inability to secure their creations, such SMEs are falling far beyond their larger counterparts when it comes to economic development. Utility patents can help close this gap. Utility model rights will thus be favorable to India's legal system.

India is lagging adrift when it comes to plugging the gaps in its innovation pipeline. Many utility model patents appear to have a positive impact on start-ups and small businesses. India would be able to bridge the distance between patentable & non-patentable ideas if it adopts this complete paradigm.

Utility models may be able to address the deficiencies of the Indian patent laws, given that they would be implemented inside a regulatory framework that is beneficial to our own financial system & industrial sector. There must be no attempt to undermine the patent system by using the utility model. When it comes to development & economic growth, it must be a goal to encourage the spread of ideas and imagination throughout the nation.

Because there is a large range of businesses with innovative skills but no technological or legal assistance to seek IPR or that do not meet the global patent standards, they are unable to safeguard their designs and incur significant damages. As a consequence, the level of rivalry among similar businesses declines, which in turn hurts customers.

Bibliography:
References:

1. Interns, I. (2017, May 27). Utility Patents & Its Position in India. Intepat. Retrieved from https://www.intepat.com/blog/patent/utility-patents/?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=LinkedIn-integration.
2. Utility Patents. Vakil Search. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://vakilsearch.com/permanent-patent/utility-patent-in-india.
3. Kenton, W. (2021, March 31). Utility Patent. Investopedia. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/utility-patent.asp
4. Singal, T. (2021, June 13). Understanding the utility requirement of a patent. iPleaders. Retrieved from https://blog.ipleaders.in/understanding-the-utility-requirement-of-a-patent/#Utility_requirement_of_a_patent_in_India.
5. SS Rana & Co. (2018, February 15). India: Does the Establishment of Utility Model make sense? Lexology. Retrieved from https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e8993fb2-d10d-477f-bdd6-66af84c33b2a.
6. Kumar, A. (2021, October 2). Does the establishment of a utility model make sense: Indian scenario. iPleaders. Retrieved from https://blog.ipleaders.in/does-the-establishment-of-utility-model-make-sense-indian-scenario/#Need_for_utility_model_in_India.
7. Mohapatra, A. (2021, May 19). The concept of utility model patent. iPleaders. Retrieved from https://blog.ipleaders.in/the-concept-of-utility-model-patent/#Indian_perspective.
8. Sen, P. (n.d.). Utility model and its need for protection in India. Legal Service India. Retrieved from https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-2338-utility-model-and-its-need-for-protection-in-india.html.
9. Sharma, G., & Kumar, H. (2018). Exploring the Possibilities of Utility Models Patent Regime for Grassroots Innovations in India. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 23, 119-130. Retrieved from http://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/7C7521B6-2021-457A-8672-EC67F2D7A192.pdf.
10. Beijing Sanyo Intellectual Property Agency Ltd. (2019, May 20). Utility model patent strategy in China. World Trademark Review. Retrieved from https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/utility-model-patent-strategy-china.
11. Chinese utility model patents. Lehman, Lee & Xu. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.lehmanlaw.com/resource-centre/faqs/intellectual-property/patent/chinese-utility-model-patents.html.
12. Patents, Rules, and Regulations. (2010, January 22). Chinese Utility Models: A Closer Look. Nutter. Retrieved from https://www.nutter.com/ip-law-bulletin/chinese-utility-models-a-closer-look.
13. Kenton, W. (2021, March 31). Utility Patent. Investopedia. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/utility-patent.asp#citation-1.
14. Utility Patents. Justia. (2021, October). Retrieved from https://www.justia.com/intellectual-property/patents/types-of-patents/utility/.
15. Suthersanen, U. (2006, February). Utility Models and Innovation in Developing Countries. UNCTAD. Retrieved from https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/iteipc20066_en.pdf.
16. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/strategy/intellectual-property/patent-protection-eu/utility-models_en
17. 92 Ind Cal 1008
18. Cipla Ltd. vs F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. & Anr. on 27 November 2015 (indiankanoon.org)
19. https://wCornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. "35 U.S. Code Sec. 101 - Inventions patentable, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/101?_ga=2.104702848.1286584459.1519416782-59586957.1519416782ww.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/data/patdesc.htm
20. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. "2701 Patent Term [R-10.2019]." https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2701.html
21. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. "Maintain your patent", https://www.uspto.gov/patents/maintain