See ISPE Guidelines 5.20. The EPO applies option A5.20[2] of the Appendix to Chapter 5 of the ISPE Guidelines.

GL-PCT F IV 4.1 Clarity

Where it is found that the claims lack clarity, it may be appropriate for the examiner to first invite the applicant to provide informal clarification before the search is carried out (see GL/PCT‑EPO B‑VIII, 3.3-3.6).

GL-PCT F IV 4 Clarity and interpretation of claims

4.1 Clarity

4.2 Interpretation

4.3 Inconsistencies

4.4 General statements, "spirit" of invention

4.5 Essential features

4.6 Relative terms

GL-PCT F IV 3.8.3 Cases where the invention is realised in a distributed computing environment

Section F‑IV, 3.9.3, in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO applies mutatis mutandis.

GL-PCT F IV 3.8.2 Cases where method steps require specific data processing means and/or require additional technical devices as essential features

Section F‑IV, 3.9.2, in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO applies mutatis mutandis.

GL-PCT F IV 3.8.1 Cases where all method steps can be fully implemented by generic data processing means

Section F‑IV, 3.9.1, in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO applies mutatis mutandis.

GL-PCT F IV 3.8 Claims directed to computer-implemented inventions

Section F‑IV, 3.9, in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO applies mutatis mutandis.

3.8.1 Cases where all method steps can be fully implemented by generic data processing means

3.8.2 Cases where method steps require specific data processing means and/or require additional technical devices as essential features

GL-PCT F IV 3.7 Independent claims containing a reference to another claim or to features from a claim of another category

Section F‑IV, 3.8, in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO applies mutatis mutandis.[GL/ISPE 5.19; ]

GL-PCT F IV 4.4 General statements, "spirit" of invention

GL-PCT F IV 4.3 Inconsistencies

GL-PCT F IV 4.2 Interpretation