In Rule 164(2) cases, a further communication according to Art. 94(3) and Rules 71(1) and Rule 71(2) repeating a lack of unity objection is not necessary, as a communication according to Art. 94(3) and Rule 71(1) and Rule 71(2) addressing (also) unity of invention has already been issued under Rule 164(2)(b) (see also H‑II, 2.3 and H‑II, 7.2).
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/guidelines/e/h_ii_7_4_1.htm
Date retrieved: 30 December 2018