The Madras High Court has dismissed an appeal seeking a review of a patent claim for a product designed to integrate human intelligence with AI capabilities. The appeal was filed by Caleb Suresh Motupalli, challenging the order of the Controller of Patents, but the court found no sufficient grounds to interfere with the decision.
Background of the Case
The applicant sought a patent for a product titled “Necktie Persona-Extender/Environment-Integrator and Method for Super-Augmenting a Persona to Manifest a Pan-Environment Super-Cyborg,” claiming priority over a U.S. patent. The invention aimed to enhance human abilities by integrating AI and human intelligence.
However, the First Examination Report (FER) raised objections, citing lack of innovation, unclear applicability, and non-compliance with the Patents Act. Despite amendments and further hearings, the Controller rejected the claim, maintaining the original objections. The applicant then filed a review petition, which was also rejected, leading to this appeal.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
- The court concurred with the Controller, stating that the patent claims were vague and lacked clear technical features.
- The invention failed to meet the requirements of the Patents Act due to its ambiguity and lack of clear methodology.
- It lacked real technical effect and did not substantiate its claim of super-augmenting a user.
- The court also noted that the Controller erred by treating the review application as a fresh patent application, conducting a second hearing instead of dismissing it outright.
Ultimately, the court upheld the Controller’s decision, rejecting the appeal and reinforcing the importance of clarity and innovation in patent applications.
