Synthetic Biology And Patentability In India.
1. Understanding Synthetic Biology
Synthetic biology is an advanced branch of biotechnology that involves:
Designing and constructing new biological parts, devices, and systems, or
Redesigning existing natural biological systems for useful purposes.
Examples include:
Artificially engineered microorganisms
Synthetic genes and DNA sequences
Modified metabolic pathways
Bio-circuits and engineered cells
Because synthetic biology blurs the line between natural life forms and human-made inventions, patent law faces unique challenges.
2. Patent Law Framework in India
Patentability in India is governed by the Patents Act, 1970, especially:
Section 2(1)(j)
Defines an “invention” as:
A new product or process
Involving inventive step
Capable of industrial application
Section 3 – Non-Patentable Subject Matter
For synthetic biology, the most relevant provisions are:
Section 3(c): Discovery of a scientific principle or living/non-living thing occurring in nature
Section 3(d): Mere discovery of a new form of a known substance
Section 3(j): Plants, animals, and essentially biological processes
Section 3(i): Medical or therapeutic methods
3. Patentability of Synthetic Biology in India
Patentable (Generally):
✔ Genetically modified microorganisms
✔ Synthetic DNA sequences with human intervention
✔ Engineered biological processes
✔ Recombinant proteins produced through synthetic methods
Not Patentable:
✘ Naturally occurring genes or organisms
✘ Plants and animals as such
✘ Pure discoveries without human modification
Indian law follows a strict “human intervention” test.
4. Key Case Laws (Detailed Analysis)
Case 1: Dimminaco AG v. Controller of Patents (2002)
Facts:
Dimminaco AG filed a patent application for a process producing a live virus vaccine (Bursitis vaccine) involving biological activity.
The Patent Office rejected the application arguing:
The end product contained living organisms
Living products were not patentable
Issue:
Can a process resulting in a product containing living organisms be patented?
Judgment:
The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Dimminaco AG.
Key Observations:
The Act does not prohibit patents merely because a product is alive
What matters is human intervention and industrial applicability
The vaccine was not naturally occurring; it was man-made
Significance:
✔ Landmark case recognizing biotechnological inventions
✔ Opened doors for synthetic biology patents
✔ Established that living matter is not automatically excluded
Case 2: Monsanto Technology LLC v. Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. (2019)
Facts:
Monsanto patented a genetically modified Bt gene introduced into cotton seeds to resist pests.
Indian seed companies argued:
The invention was essentially a plant
Barred under Section 3(j)
Issue:
Are genetically modified genes patentable when used in plants?
Supreme Court Observations:
Genes per se may be patentable
But plants containing those genes are not
If the invention’s end use is a plant, Section 3(j) applies
Outcome:
The dispute was remanded, but crucial legal principles were laid down.
Significance:
✔ Distinction between gene patent and plant patent
✔ Synthetic biology inventions must be claimed carefully
✔ Reinforced India’s restrictive approach
Case 3: Novartis AG v. Union of India (2013)
Relevance to Synthetic Biology:
Although not directly about synthetic biology, the case shaped biotechnology patent standards.
Facts:
Novartis sought a patent for a modified form of an existing drug (beta crystalline form of Imatinib).
Issue:
Does modification alone make an invention patentable?
Supreme Court Ruling:
Mere enhancement without significant therapeutic efficacy is not patentable
Section 3(d) strictly limits incremental inventions
Application to Synthetic Biology:
✔ Synthetic modifications must show real functional advantage
✔ Minor genetic changes are insufficient
✔ Prevents “evergreening” in biotech patents
Case 4: Syngenta Participations AG v. Union of India (2007)
Facts:
Syngenta applied for a patent involving a method to produce transgenic plants with pest resistance.
Issue:
Whether the method was an “essentially biological process” under Section 3(j).
Ruling:
The Delhi High Court held:
If the process involves substantial human intervention
And is not purely natural reproduction
→ It may be patentable
Importance:
✔ Clarified scope of “essentially biological process”
✔ Helped patent synthetic biological processes
✔ Recognized lab-controlled genetic engineering as patentable
Case 5: Enercon (India) Ltd. v. Aloys Wobben (2013)
Indirect Relevance:
The Supreme Court emphasized strict compliance with patent disclosure requirements.
Importance for Synthetic Biology:
Biotech patents must clearly disclose
Genetic sequences
Processes
Functional data
Failure leads to invalidation
Significance:
✔ Reinforces need for complete biological disclosure
✔ Critical for synthetic gene and protein patents
Case 6: AstraZeneca AB v. Intas Pharmaceuticals (2020)
Facts:
Concerned biotech pharmaceutical patents involving complex molecular engineering.
Key Holding:
Inventions involving biological molecules must demonstrate:
Inventive step
Technical advancement
Industrial applicability
Importance:
✔ Courts are willing to protect complex biotech inventions
✔ Synthetic biology inventions are patentable if well-substantiated
5. Key Legal Principles Emerging from Case Laws
1. Human Intervention Test
If the invention:
Is created through laboratory engineering
Does not exist in nature
→ It is patentable
2. Product vs Process Distinction
Processes involving synthetic biology are easier to patent
Living end products face stricter scrutiny
3. Claim Drafting Is Critical
Claims should focus on:
Synthetic constructs
Engineered sequences
Technical processes
Avoid claiming plants or animals directly
6. Challenges in India for Synthetic Biology Patents
Strict interpretation of Section 3(j)
Ethical concerns over life forms
Lack of sui generis protection for synthetic organisms
Uncertainty over gene patent scope
7. Conclusion
India adopts a balanced but restrictive approach to synthetic biology patenting:
Encourages innovation
Prevents monopolization of life forms
Prioritizes public interest
With proper human intervention, technical advancement, and careful claim drafting, synthetic biology inventions are patentable in India, as demonstrated by evolving judicial interpretation.
RELATED Blog
comments