Novartis filed for a patent on imatinib mesylate, which is used for treating Chronic Myeloid Leukemia. On publication of the patent application, the Cancer Patients Aid Association along with a group of generic drug-makers filed an opposition against the application. The Chennai Patent Office, India, rejected the patent application on grounds relating to Section 3, lack of novelty and so on. Novartis filed writs at Madras High Court challenging the rejection of its patent application and asked for a stay of the decision of the patent office. It also challenged the constitutional validity of section 3 and submitted that the section is not in conformity with India's obligations under the TRIPs Agreement.

Ultidge Incorporated, a company founded by Matsushita Electric, Mitsubishi Electric and Sony Corporation in Japan, is working on a patent pool in digital TV tuners. The patent space relating to digital TV tuners is very crowded and requires multiple license transactions with different parties to implement the technology. Ultidge believes that the patent pool would reduce transaction costs for multiple licenses by enabling a party  to take a single license over all patents relating to digital TV in one transaction. Uldige plans to manage the patent portfolio and license the patents to interested parties. The company has now requested the patent owners to join the patent pool.

The controversy relating to embryonic stem cell patents continues with Public Patent Foundation filing for revocation and examining division revoking patents and patent applications of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF). WARF owns three patents relating to primate embryonic stem cells and  method of isolating them at the US Patent Office (Patent numbers are 5,843,780, 6,200,806 and 7,029,913). Scientists are not happy with these patent grants as they believe that such patents impede research in the field. Public Patent Foundation filed a request for reexamination of the patents on behalf  of  the  Foundation  for  Taxpayer  and  Consumer  Rights (FTCR) claiming that the patents lack novelty and non-obviousness. They argued that the patents block research and require payment of tax payer money in the form of license fee, making them not worthy of patent grant. In Europe, a patent application relating to primate embryonic stem cells was filed by WARF at European Patent Office  but the examining division rejected the patent stating that it was against public order and morality. The question has now been referred to Enlarged board of appeals of European Patent Office for clarification.