Form 8 — Request or Claim Regarding the Mention of an Inventor
Form 8 asks the Controller to name a person as an inventor in a patent or application, or to decide a claim about that mention.
What Form 8 is for
Being named as an inventor carries no ownership rights, but it carries reputation, and in academic and research careers that matters a great deal. Section 28 recognises this by allowing a person to be mentioned as an inventor in the patent and in the register, on request or on claim. Form 8 is the vehicle for that request or claim, and Rules 66 and 67 set out how each is made.
There are two situations. In the first, the applicant or the patentee asks that a person be mentioned as an inventor. That is straightforward where everyone agrees. In the second, a person who has not been named claims that they ought to be mentioned, and the Controller decides that claim after giving the interested parties an opportunity to be heard. The second situation is contested and turns on evidence about who devised what.
The mention of an inventor does not change who owns the patent, and it does not give the mentioned person a share of the rights. Section 28 makes the distinction explicit in substance: the mention is an acknowledgement of the fact of invention, not a transfer of any interest. Because the prescribed forms are amended from time to time, download the current Form 8 from the Indian Patent Office rather than reusing an old copy.
Who files it, and when
The applicant or patentee files it where the request is made on their side. Where the request is a claim, it is filed by the person who says they should be mentioned, which is typically a researcher, engineer or student who contributed to the conception of the invention but was left out. Other parties with an interest in the patent may be heard before the Controller decides a contested claim.
It can be filed during prosecution or after grant. Timing is governed by the periods the Rules prescribe for each kind of request, and those periods have been changed by amendment, so the current text of Rules 66 and 67 must be checked before assuming any particular window. As a practical matter, the earlier the request the better. A correction made during prosecution can be reflected when the patent is granted, while a correction after grant means amending an existing record and, in a contested case, running a proceeding against a patentee who may resist.
How it is filed
- Establish the factual basis for the claim, going back to laboratory notebooks, design files, project records and dated communications.
- Check the claims of the specification, since inventorship is judged against what is actually claimed, not against the project as a whole.
- Approach the applicant or patentee first where possible, because an agreed request is far quicker than a contested claim.
- Complete the current Form 8, identifying the application or patent and the person to be mentioned.
- File it with a statement of the facts relied on and the supporting evidence, paying the fee prescribed in the First Schedule.
- Serve or notify the other interested parties as the Rules require, and be ready for their response.
- Attend the hearing if the Controller directs one, and be prepared to speak to the evidence.
What the form asks for
- The application number or patent number and the title of the invention.
- The name and address of the person to be mentioned as an inventor.
- A statement of the contribution said to make that person an inventor, tied to the claims.
- The evidence relied on, such as records, drawings, correspondence or statements from other inventors.
- The position of the applicant or patentee, where the request is agreed.
- Details of any related request already made about inventorship on the same file.
Described in general terms. Form contents are prescribed in the Second Schedule and change — download the current version from the Patent Office rather than working from any summary, including this one.
Common mistakes with Form 8
- Confusing mention as an inventor with a share of ownership. The mention is an acknowledgement of authorship of the invention and does not by itself give any right in the patent.
- Bringing a claim based on general project involvement rather than on a contribution to the conception of what is claimed.
- Waiting years after grant, by which time records have been destroyed and the people who could confirm the account have moved on.
- Filing the claim without notifying the applicant or patentee, when the Rules provide for the interested parties to be heard.
- Relying only on a personal account with no contemporaneous document, which is difficult to weigh against a documented record.
What happens if it goes wrong
If no request is made, the patent and the register continue to show an inventor list that omits or misstates the position, and the omitted person receives no recognition on the public record. If a claim is made but not supported by evidence, the Controller can refuse it and the record stands. If it succeeds, the patent and the register are altered to include the mention, and the corrected record then follows the patent through licensing, academic assessment and any later dispute about entitlement.
A left-out researcher at a Kharagpur laboratory
This is a simplified illustration. Devashri Pillai works as a junior research fellow in a materials laboratory near Kharagpur. She proposes a change in the sintering profile that becomes the distinguishing feature of the main claim in a patent later granted to the institute. When she leaves for a job elsewhere, the inventor list is prepared without her, and she learns of the grant only when a colleague sends her the published patent. She writes to the institute, which reviews its records but cannot agree internally. She then files Form 8 as a claim, attaching her signed and dated laboratory notebook pages, an internal presentation carrying her name and the sintering profile, and an email from the project head thanking her for the suggestion. The institute is given an opportunity to respond, and the Controller considers the material before deciding whether the mention should be made.
Simplified illustration only. Actual outcomes depend on the facts.
Questions about Form 8
Does being mentioned as an inventor give me a share of the patent?
No. Mention as an inventor is recognition of the fact that you devised the invention. Ownership is a separate question governed by employment terms, assignments and agreements. Many inventors are named on patents owned entirely by their employers. That said, the mention can matter a great deal in practice, because it appears on the published patent and in the register, it is used in academic and professional assessment, and it can be relevant background if an entitlement dispute is raised separately.
Can a name be removed as well as added?
Section 28 deals with the mention of an inventor, and it provides for claims and for the Controller to decide them after hearing the interested parties, which in practice includes situations where a named person's mention is disputed. The precise route depends on the situation and on the current text of the Rules, which have been amended. Because a disputed removal affects a named individual's record, it is handled on evidence and after the parties are heard, not as an administrative correction.
What evidence works best in an inventorship claim?
Contemporaneous documents carry the most weight. Dated laboratory notebooks, version-controlled design files, internal presentations, meeting minutes and emails that show who proposed the feature the claims rely on are far stronger than recollection given years later. Statements from the other named inventors also help, particularly where they confirm the sequence of events. The evidence should be tied to the specific claimed feature, because the question is not who worked hard on the project but who contributed to the invention as claimed.
Should I try to resolve inventorship before filing the patent application?
Yes, as a matter of ordinary practice. Reviewing the inventor list against the claims before the complete specification is filed is quick, and it avoids a correction that later needs evidence, notice to the other side and a decision by the Controller. Research organisations that run a short inventorship check at drafting stage, and again if the claims change materially during prosecution, very rarely need this form at all. This is general guidance and not advice on any particular file.
Left off a patent as an inventor?
MYCrave Consultancy & Services explains how mention of an inventor is claimed and what evidence supports it.