AbstractThis article attempts to look at the recent significant 7-1 ruling dated May 30, 2017 handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. 581 US _(2017) to see if it can help shed some light on the true scope and import of the Indian patent law on the so-called "parallel imports" i.e. Section 107A(b) of the Patents Act, 1970 (as amended), and in particular to see if it embodies the so-called doctrine of "international exhaustion" and if yes, does it cover within its sweep a possibility of "conditional sale" so as not to erode the principle of "exhaustion"?
Unless specified by prior arrangement, the author agrees to the following terms and assurances:
- For myself and on behalf of the other authors listed on this work, I assign to thinkBiotech LLC the copyright* in the contribution for the full term throughout the world.
- I/we further give to the following assurances
- I am the sole author of the contribution, or, if not, I have the written authority of the other authors to transfer the copyright* to thinkBiotech LLC and give these warranties;
- I and (where appropriate) the other authors are entitled to transfer the copyright to thinkBiotech LLC and no one else would be entitled to prevent us from publishing the contribution;
- To the best of my/our knowledge, all the facts in the contribution are true and accurate;
- The content of the contribution is entirely original to me (and where appropriate to the other authors) or, if not, the written permission of the owner of the copyright in any material copied from elsewhere has been obtained for all media (all such permissions to be attached to the contribution as supplementary files);
- Nothing in the contribution is obscene or libellous;
- Nothing in the contribution infringes any duty of confidentiality which I/or the other authors may owe to anyone else.
- I and/or the other authors have obtained the appropriate clearances from my/our employer(s) or other concerned institution(s).