Court order in 'Covishield' trademark lawsuit likely on January 30

A Pune court hearing a suit filed by a pharmaceutical firm over the brand name 'Covishield', used by the SII for its COVID-19 vaccine, is likely to deliver its order in the case on January 30

A Pune court hearing a suit filed

by a pharmaceutical firm over the brand name 'Covishield', used by the Serum Institute of India (SII) for its COVID-19 vaccine, is likely to deliver its order in the case on January 30.

Cutis-Biotech had filed the suit in the civil court on January 4, seeking to restrain the SII from using the trademark Covishield or any other similar names for its COVID-19 vaccine and claimed the pharma firm is a prior user of the brand name.

On Tuesday, the SII had filed its response to the lawsuit, stating that both the firms operate in different product categories and there is no scope for confusion over the trademark.

Advocate S K Jain, representing the SII, said he argued in the court on Friday that Cutis-Biotech had filed another application before trademark registry for a vaccine in the name of Covishield in December 2020.

"However, SII applied for the trademark in June 2020. Thus, SII becomes the prior and first user of the trademark Covishield," said Jain, adding that he also presented some material which showed that the work of printing the material having the name of Covishield had begun in March last year itself.

"In such a scenario, SII becomes the first user of the trademark," Jain said.

Jain said the case filed by the plaintiff should be dismissed as it had cheated the court by not revealing all the information related to the second application of December last year before the trademark registry for a vaccine under the name Covishield.

Advocate Aditya Soni, representing Cutis-Biotech, countered the SII lawyer's argument about product distinction, and said it was not necessary that the products should be identical and it was sufficient if the goods are similar, he said.

Soni said he had cited some judgements to counter the SII's lawyer's point that the plaintiff firm did not reveal the details about their December 2020 application.

"It is irrelevant to attach the documents (related to the application made by Cutis-Biotech to trademark registry for a vaccine under the name Covishield) to the present case," Soni said.

After hearing both the sides, Additional Sessions Judge A V Rotte kept the hearing on January 30 when the order is expected to be delivered in the case.