GL B XI 3.4 Extent of first analysis for generally deficient applications

Where the application is found to be generally deficient, the search division does not carry out a detailed analysis, but sends a search opinion to the applicants informing them of its opinion, mentioning the major deficiencies and saying that when the application enters the examination stage, further examination will be deferred until these have been removed by amendment.

GL B XI 3.3 Comments and amendments in response to the search opinion

Subject to certain exceptions, the applicant is required to respond to the search opinion (see B‑XI, 8).

GL B XI 3.2.2 Positive statements

The search division also makes positive statements on patentability in the search opinion, where applicable. The level of detail is such as to assist applicants in their decision-making. Therefore, it is not necessary to provide such detailed reasoning as for a negative objection, but a mere statement without any explanation is sufficient only if the reason is immediately apparent.

GL B XI 3.2.1 Reasoned objections

For each objection the search opinion indicates the part of the application which is deficient and the requirement of the EPC which is not met, either by referring to specific articles or rules, or by other clear indication; it also gives the reason for any objection where this is not immediately apparent. For example, where prior art is cited and only part of a cited document is relevant, the particular passage relied upon is identified.

GL B XI 3.2 Reasoning

3.2.1 Reasoned objections

3.2.2 Positive statements

GL B XI 3.1 The search division's dossier

The search division's first step is to study the description, drawings (if any) and the claims of the application. In carrying out its task, the search division will have access to the documents making up the European application and a complete history of the proceedings up to the start of search. However, the priority documents together with any translations may not yet be available at this stage (see B‑XI, 4).[Rule 62; ]

GL B XI 3 Analysis of the application and content of the search opinion

Where it is held that the application and/or the invention to which it relates does not satisfy the requirements of the EPC, then corresponding objections are raised in the search opinion.

The search opinion covers, as a general rule, all objections to the application (but see B‑XI, 3.4).

GL B XI 2.2 Applications containing claims filed after the accorded date of filing

Where the application documents contain one or more claims filed after the accorded date of filing (Rules 40(1), 57(c) and 58), the search division is required to examine whether or not the one or more claims fulfil the requirements of Art. 123(2) in the light of the technical content of the application documents filed at the accorded date of filing.

GL B XI 2.1 Applications containing missing parts of description and/or drawings filed under Rule 56 EPC or Rule 20 PCT

If the Receiving Section decided not to re-date the application under Rule 56(2) or (5), but the search division is of the opinion that the subsequently filed missing parts are not "completely contained" in the priority document and/or the requirements of Rule 56(3) are not fulfilled, it carries out the search also taking into account prior art which might become relevant for assessing novelty and inventive step of the subject-

GL B XI 2 Basis of the search opinion

Where the application is a European application not derived from an international application, applicants cannot amend their application before the search report has been communicated to them. Consequently, in these cases, the search opinion will always relate to the application documents as originally filed.