Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

13. According to learned counsel, the processes of dissolving, filtering, heating, reheating and drying are not only part of common general knowledge but that D1 discloses these steps. He further submitted that the doping of potassium without using a reagent happens in-situ, without the inventor's input, and cannot be said to constitute a technical or economic advancement under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act. Moreover, he pointed out that the claim that by using stainless steel sieve, filter paper and cotton cloth as filtrate material, 0.45, 0.71 and 0.85, respectively, weight percentage of potassium is released is untenable because 100% release of potassium ion cannot be expected given that reaction takes place on the adsorbed or absorbed potassium on the filtering material. Further, he submitted that use of filter paper on an industrial scale is more expensive than adding potassium ion as a reactant because the filtering material needs to be changed frequently to achieve the disclosed potassium ion content as the filtering material loses all the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (T)CMA(PT)/52/2023 potassium ion at one stage. He also submitted that established procedures are not known for monitoring potassium content in the product to achieve the desired quantity of potassium. Additionally, he submitted that hot air oven drying is impracticable in large scale industries. Because of these reasons, he concluded his submissions by contending that the claimed invention does not satisfy the requirements of an ‘invention’ under Section 2(1)(j) of the Patents Act.

24. One of the grounds of rejection was that a new reactant was not used. In order to understand what constitutes a 'reactant', I refer to the Oxford Dictionary of Chemistry (8th ed., 2020):

“chemical reaction: A change in which one or more or compounds (the reactants) form new https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (T)CMA(PT)/52/2023 compounds (the products).” Thus, for a compound to be considered as a reactant, it must trigger or cause a chemical reaction to form a new compound. In the claimed invention, the filtrate material is merely used for the purpose of filtering. In the complete specification, there is nothing to indicate that the use of stainless steel sieve or cotton or filter paper as filtering material causes a chemical reaction. The filtrate material in the claimed invention acts as a mere medium that facilitates the doping of potassium with AP and recrystallization during the filtering process.

Industrial capability:

25. Next, I deal with the finding that the claimed invention is not “capable of industrial application”. Relevant portions of paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 of the impugned order are as below:

“12. ... Because the applicant disclosed that “EDAX analysis is performed on the stainless- steel sieve, cotton cloth and the filter paper, employed for the filtering process, to examine if these contained any potassium. It is noticed that, stainless steel sieve, filter paper and cotton cloth has 0.45, 0.71 and 0.85 percentages by weight of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (T)CMA(PT)/52/2023 potassium, respectively”. From the above while preparing the potassium doped ammonium perchlorate in large scale in industries we can get the maximum potassium content on product 0.45, 0.71 and 0.85 if a stainless steel sieve, cotton cloth and filter paper are used as filtering material respectively assuming that 100% release of potassium ion. But we cannot expect 100% release because that the reaction is taking place on the adsorbed or absorbed potassium on the filtering material. In the industrial scale process filter paper in not advisable in general. While preparing large scale, at one stage the filtering material looses all the potassium ion therefore there is a need to change the filtering material with the new one in order to achieve the potassium content on the product has disclosed in the present invention.

And that may make the invention more expensive that adding a potassium ion as a source reactant.

13. Also there is a need to monitor the potassium content on the product and allowing more contact time without any established procedures to get the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (T)CMA(PT)/52/2023 expected result, this has to be done by trial. The instant invention discloses as a potassium ion in the filtering material and potassium doped ammonium perchlorate product and failed disclose what type of potassium compound. Moreover, while using the cotton cloth or filter paper as a filtering material it has to be placed on some material as support for the filtration to take place. If the support material has any potassium ion, that will also be acquired by ammonium perchlorate at the first instance. Replacing the stainless-steel sieve filter is more expensive than the cotton cloth filter on large scale production.