{"id":7151,"date":"2020-04-22T13:04:42","date_gmt":"2020-04-22T07:34:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/?p=7151"},"modified":"2024-11-19T12:27:42","modified_gmt":"2024-11-19T06:57:42","slug":"revocation-of-patent-in-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Revocation of Patent in India: A Complete Overview"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">With the signing of the TRIPS agreement in 2005, the Indian Patent Act, 1970 was amended. The amendment was made in Section 25 of the Indian Patent Act, 1970, and the ability to oppose after or before the grant of Patent was included in the Act.&nbsp; The amendment in the Act, ensured proper adoption of Intellectual Property and international harmonization of the Patent regime. The Revocation of Patent is done in the cases where it is deemed to be against the public policy of the Central Government or <strong>Patent Infringement<\/strong> or Claim by Licensors. In this article, we will discuss the Revocation of Patent in India. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title ez-toc-toggle\" style=\"cursor:pointer\">Page Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 eztoc-toggle-hide-by-default' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/#What_is_a_Patent\" >What is a Patent?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/#What_is_Revocation_of_Patent\" >What is Revocation of\nPatent?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/#Who_can_file_for_the_Revocation_of_Patent_Petition\" >Who can file for the Revocation of Patent Petition?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/#Where_can_a_Revocation_of_Patent_Petition_be_filed\" >Where can a Revocation\nof Patent Petition be filed?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/#What_are_the_grounds_for_the_Revocation_of_Patent\" >What are the grounds\nfor the Revocation of Patent?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/revocation-of-patent-in-india\/#Conclusion\" >Conclusion<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"What_is_a_Patent\"><\/span>What is a Patent?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>A Patent is a title that provides the owner with an exclusive right to prevent other people from misusing the invention of the owner, which is mentioned in the Patent.<\/em><\/strong> Patent gives the right to exclude other people from using, selling, or importing the patented invention of the owner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A Patent, when approved, does not infer that the same will stay unopposed\nby any party during its lifetime. In spite of approving of a Patent, it can be\nput to trial by any person on numerous grounds, either by way of revocation\nproceedings or through a post-grant opposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A Patent is granted for a definite field in a defined country and only\nfor a maximum of 20 years. Patent will only be granted in the name of the owner\nof the invention of the owner does the full revelation of the invention and\npublication of the technical facts of the invention. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A Patent is basically an agreement between an originator and the\nGovernment in which the originator is given a short-term control in return for\nallowing the invention to be made public to aid in the advancement of the\ngeneral people\u2019s knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>The legislation which deals with the <\/em><\/strong><em><a href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/patent-registration\"><strong>Patent Registration<\/strong><\/a><\/em><strong><em> and Protection in India is The Patent Act, 1970, and The Patent Rules, 2003. <\/em><\/strong>The Patent Act, 1970, has undergone certain amendments in the years 1999, 2002, and 2005. In the year 2005, an amendment was introduced related to the Protection of Product Patent for pharma, food, and chemical inventions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>In India to qualify for a Patent, an invention\nor a product has to satisfy the following criteria:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul>\n<li>The invention should be unknown to the public.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The invention must have a feature different from any previous\ninvention. <\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The invention is considered useful.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The originality of the invention should not be obvious to any person\nwho has some knowledge of the area related to the invention.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"What_is_Revocation_of_Patent\"><\/span>What is Revocation of\nPatent?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>A Patent when is sealed or granted, it is not\nalways the case that the Patent should stay unobstructed by any person or third\nparty throughout the life of the Patent.<\/em><\/strong> <strong><em>Certain people can challenge the Patent\non several grounds, and the way by which the Patent can be challenged is by\nRevocation of Patent. <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Patent Act does not assume that the Patents granted to be valid;\nhence, the rights granted on such granted Patents cannot be absolute. The third\nparties which are required to seek consent from Patentee of the granted Patent\nfor practicing of any exclusive rights bestowed upon him\/her are also given an\nopportunity to challenge the validity of the Patents. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Section 64 of the Patent Act, 1970<\/em><\/strong>, does not restrict the grounds of Patent Revocation to only those provided in Section 64, whereas section 25 (2) also set out grounds that are used in post-grant opposition proceedings is restrictive in nature. Hence, it can be said that Section 64 is not exhaustive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Who_can_file_for_the_Revocation_of_Patent_Petition\"><\/span>Who can file for the Revocation of Patent Petition?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>The Patent Act, 1970, in Section 64 provides\nfor the persons who can file the petition of Revocation of Patent. The persons\nare as follows:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul>\n<li>any interested person;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>the Central Government;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>the person is making the counter-claim for the infringement of a patent\nin a suit.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Where_can_a_Revocation_of_Patent_Petition_be_filed\"><\/span>Where can a Revocation\nof Patent Petition be filed?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>A petition for the Revocation of\nPatent should be filed in the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IAPB) by\nany of the persons specified under section 64 of the Patent Act, 1970. &nbsp;<\/em><\/strong>As per\nSection 104 of the Patent Act, 1970, provides for the jurisdiction aspect for\nfiling of the Revocation of Patent petition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Section 104 states that the Revocation petition claiming Infringement of Patent should not be filed in any court, which is inferior to District Court having the jurisdiction to try the Infringement suit. On the other hand, in case of a counter-claim is filed for the Revocation of Patent made by the defendant, such counter-claim or suit for Patent Infringement should be transferred to the High Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"text-left\"><b>Read our article<\/b>:<mark style=\"background: #fffd03 !important;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/penalties-suits-and-appeals-against-the-patent-infringement\/\">Penalties, Suits and Appeals Against the Patent Infringement<\/a><\/mark><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"What_are_the_grounds_for_the_Revocation_of_Patent\"><\/span>What are the grounds\nfor the Revocation of Patent?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>The grounds for Revocation are provided under the following sections of the Patent Act, 1970:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"576\" height=\"340\" src=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/04\/image-80.png\" alt=\"grounds for the Revocation of Patent\" class=\"wp-image-7152\" srcset=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/04\/image-80.png 576w, https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/04\/image-80-300x177.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Section 64-Grounds for Revocation of Patent<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>The\nvarious grounds for Revocation of Patent as per section 64 of the Patent Act,\n1970, are as follows:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul>\n<li>An invention\nwith similar specifications in any other Patent already granted in India with\nan earlier filing date or priority date;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The grant of\nPatent was done to a person who was not entitled for the same;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Patent was wrongfully obtained by a person from another person who\nis actually entitled to the same. Another person who is actually entitled to\nthe Patent can apply for Revocation of Patent; <\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The invention which is claimed in the granted Patent is not actual as\nper <strong><em>Section 2(1)(j) of the Patent Act, 1970<\/em><\/strong>;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the Patent\nthe invention claimed lacked in novelty with regard to prior public use or\nprior knowledge;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The invention is\nnot of any usage, means that the Patent is not in operation at all or is not\nproviding the desired results as specified in the specifications of Patent;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the Patent\nthe invention is obvious with regard to prior public use or prior knowledge;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Patent lack\nany inventive step;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The claimed\ninvention does not take account of any personal document or secret use or\nsecret trail; <\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The claimed\ninvention which is imported from abroad is not new in the country India. The\ninvention is publicly known and is in use in India before the date of\npublication or priority date.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The scope of any\nclaim of a Patent is not clearly or sufficiently defined in the specifications\nof the Patent;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The claim of\nPatent is not fairly based on the matters of the specifications of Patent;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>&nbsp;The specification of the Patent does not\nfairly or sufficiently describe the Patent or the methods by which the Patent\nis invented;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Patent was\nobtained by false representation or suggestion. The suggestion or\nrepresentation should relate to any fact or statement made in connection with\nthe grant of Patent or relate to any of the specifications of the Patent;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong><em>The\nPatented invention claimed to fall under Section 3 or Section 4 of the Patent\nAct, 1970.<\/em><\/strong> Section 3\nstates the categories under which the invention if lies are not patentable in\nIndia. On the other hand, Section 4 states that any invention related to atomic\nenergy is not patentable in India; <\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The applicant of\nthe Patent has not disclosed all the required information as per <strong><em>Section\n8 of the Patent Act, 1970.<\/em><\/strong> Furthermore, the applicant has furnished\nfalse information related to the invention; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The applicant of\nthe Patent has not followed the compliance of the secrecy direction by the\nController as per <strong><em>Section 35 of the Patent Act, 1970<\/em><\/strong>;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Non-compliance\nof the secrecy direction by the Controller for filing of Patent application\noutside India without the prior permission of the Controller;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The permission\nfor amendment of complete specifications of Patent under <strong><em>Section 57 or\nSection 58 of the Patent Act, 1970, <\/em><\/strong>is obtained by applicant by fraud;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The\nspecification of the Patent does not completely disclose properly the\ngeographical origin or source of the biological material used in the invention;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The claimed\ninvention in the specification of Patent is a traditional knowledge available\nwithin any local or indigenous community in India or elsewhere.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>In the judgment\nof the case, <strong><em>Dr. Aloys Wobben &amp; Anr. vs. Yogesh Mehra &amp; Ors<\/em><\/strong>,\nthe Supreme Court (SC) has explained that as per Section 64 of the Patent Act,\n1970, Patent Revocation can be sought either by filing a Revocation petition to\nthe Intellectual property Appellate Board (IPAB) or by a counter-claim in a\nsuit of Patent Infringement. The challenger of Patent Revocation cannot attempt\nto proceed simultaneously against the Patent holder in both the matters. The\nattempt to seek one of the remedies by the Court will bar the challenger from\navailing the other remedy.&nbsp;&nbsp; <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Section 65-Revocation in cases related to Atomic Energy<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Section\n65 of the Patent Act 1970, provides that the Revocation of Patent can be done\nby the Central Government.<\/em><\/strong> The Central\nGovernment can revoke the Patent only after may revoke a Patent after establishing\nthat the invention specified in the Patent is related to Atomic Energy. The\ngrant of Patent for an invention on Atomic Energy is restricted as per the\nprovisions of the Atomic Energy Act, 1962. Hence, the Central Government cannot\nallow the grant of Patent for an invention related to Atomic Energy in India.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the case of&nbsp;<strong><em>Enercon\n(India) Ltd and Ors. vs. Enercon Gmbh<\/em>&nbsp;[(2014) 5 SCC 1],<\/strong> the\nSupreme Court laid down the fact that when post-grant opposition proceedings\nare instituted by a party in the Court related to a Patent, then the same party\ncannot institute a petition of Patent Revocation or counter-claim of Patent\nRevocation proceeding against the same Patent simultaneously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Section 66-Revocation of Patent in Public Interest<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Section\n66 of the Patent Act, 1970, states that where the Central Government is of the\nopinion that the Patent or the manner in which the rights related to Patent are\nexercised Is disadvantageous to the public at large or the State, then such a\ndetrimental Patent should be revoked. <\/em><\/strong>The\nPatent holder should be given proper opportunity with respect to his\/her right\nof being heard. After the opportunity is given to the Patent holder and\nobserving all the circumstances, the decision for the Revocation of Patent will\nbe given accordingly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For example,\nCompany Avesthagen Ltd. was granted a Patent on a product containing Jamun,\nChandan, and Lavangpatti, which was anticipated to be used in for the treatment\nof diabetes. The Company Avesthagen filed for Patent for the same product in\nthe European Patent Office (EPO). The Patent was turned down under the ground that\nthe Patent is infringed upon the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL). <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Central\nGovernment of India, on finding out about the filing of Patent in EPO, revoked\nthe Patent granted to the company Avesthagen by the Indian Patent Office under\nSection 66 of the Indian Patents Act. The ground of rejection was that the\nPatent is detrimental to the public interest at large and is also mischievous.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The company\nAvesthagen argument that though it was traditional knowledge, but the\ncircumstance that when the plants are used in the particular combination\nspecified in Patent, the plants show a faster effect. On the other hand, the\nCentral Government argued and proved that the fact that these plants specified\nin the specifications of Patent are used for the management of diabetes for a\nvery long period and was known to the public at large for centuries. The\nCentral Government stated that it is very obvious that the extracts plants will\nperform the same function<strong><em>. Hence, the Court held that the grant of Patent\ncould not be done just for re-validating a traditional knowledge.<\/em><\/strong>&nbsp; &nbsp; <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Section 85-Revocation by Controller for Non-working<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><em>As per Section 85 of the Patents Act, 1970, the Patent can be revoked for non-working. Any person interested or the Government can apply for the Revocation of Patent to the Controller with respect to the Patent for which compulsory license is granted.<\/em> The Patent Revocation should be filed within two years of the grant of the compulsory license. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em><strong>The grounds for Revocation are<\/strong>:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul>\n<li>The invention which is patented is not working the territory of India;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The reasonable requirements of the common public from the Patent is not being met;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The invention which is patented is not available to the common public at a reasonable, affordable price.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>The\napplication made by any person or the Government should be made in Form 19\nalong with the evidences supporting the Revocation.<\/em><\/strong>\nThe application if is made by a person interested, so such an interested person\nshould disclose the nature of his\/her interest. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion\"><\/span>Conclusion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>It\u2019s common for some people to come across to a matter of Patent Revocation with a general concern that \u2018this has been done earlier\u2019 or \u2018the Patent doesn\u2019t operate.&#8217;&nbsp; These are certain aspects to be taken into account when considering the various grounds of Patent Revocation.&nbsp; Several of the grounds for Patent Revocation involve complex scrutiny at a legal and practical level (within the field of the invention defined in the Patent).&nbsp; In the end, it will be the Court that decides whether or not a Patent is liable for Revocation with the support of evidence presented by the parties. If you think that there are sufficient grounds for Revocation of Patent available, then legal advice should be taken from experienced professionals. We at <a href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/\"><strong><em>Corpbiz<\/em><\/strong><\/a> have experts who will help you with the process of Patent Revocation. Our experts will guide you with the process of Revocation. Our experts will ensure the successful and timely completion of your work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"text-left\"><b>Read our article<\/b>:<mark style=\"background: #fffd03 !important;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/online-patent-registration-and-filing-process-in-india\/\">Patent in India: Registration and Filing Process<\/a><\/mark><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>With the signing of the TRIPS agreement in 2005, the Indian Patent Act, 1970 was amended. The amendment was made in Section 25 of the Indian Patent Act, 1970, and the ability to oppose after or before the grant of Patent was included in the Act.&nbsp; The amendment in the Act, ensured proper adoption of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":16,"featured_media":7153,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[322,282],"tags":[511],"acf":{"service_id":"20"},"authorName":"Sakshi Sharda","authorImageUrl":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/02\/sakshi-sharda.jpg","authorDescription":"Sakshi Sharda has done BBALLB(HONS) and holds a strong knowledge on the matters pertaining to finance and law. From the past one year she is working as a legal advisor and in her leisure time she works on improvising her knowledge. Sakshi is spreading her knowledge by writing for Corpbiz.","postViews":27132,"readingTime":8,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7151"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/16"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7151"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7151\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":67260,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7151\/revisions\/67260"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7153"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}