GL B VI 4.1.2 Published international applications (WO) as "E" documents

(a)According to Art. 158(1) EPC 1973, a conflicting PCT application that validly entered the European phase before 13 December 2007 and was retrieved as an "E" document in the search for a European application will constitute prior art within the meaning of

GL B VI 4.1.1 Published European applications as "E" documents

(a)For European applications filed between 1 July 1997 and 12 December 2007, since the designation fees for European applications are paid after publication of the application (Art. 79(2) EPC 1973), the application is published with all EPC contracting states automatically designated (OJ EPO 1997, 160).

GL B VI 4.1 Potentially conflicting European and international applications

Generally, where the search is concluded less than eighteen months after the European or international filing date of the application (the filing date according to Art. 80 and not its claimed priority date(s)), it will not be possible at the time of the search to make a complete search for potentially conflicting European and international applications. This search therefore has to be completed at the examination stage by the examining division (see C‑IV, 7.1).

GL B VI 4 Conflicting applications

4.1 Potentially conflicting European and international applications

4.2 National earlier rights

GL B VI 3 Priority

If the claimed priority dates cannot be verified at this stage, uncertainty will exist as regards their validity and the search for conflicting applications is extended so as to cover all published applications with an earliest claimed priority date up to the filing date (not the claimed priority date(s)) of the application under consideration (see B‑IV, 2.3, and B‑XI, 4).

GL B VI 2 Oral disclosure, use, exhibition, etc. as state of the art

According to Art. 54 EPC, a public oral description, use, exhibition, etc. is considered as prior art if the facts of the disclosure can be proved. In particular, a written document confirming the oral disclosure can even be published after the filing date of the application being searched as it is the date of the oral disclosure which is decisive under Art. 54(2).

However, the search division, in carrying out a European search, cites an oral description, etc.

GL B VI 1 General

The general considerations relating to the state of the art and patentability, especially with regard to the determination of novelty and inventive step, are set out in G‑IV.

GL B VI – The state of the art at the search stage

1. General

2. Oral disclosure, use, exhibition, etc. as state of the art

3. Priority

4. Conflicting applications

5. Date of reference for documents cited in the search report; filing and priority date

GL B V 4 CPC classification of the application

The search division classifies a patent application under the provisions of the CPC as well as the IPC. In practice, classification is first performed in the CPC, and the relevant IPC symbols are then generated from the CPC allocations by one-to-one concordance (see the CPC to IPC Concordance List (CICL), published on the CPC website).

The CPC classification allocated is as precise and comprehensive as the classification system permits. The CPC comprises "invention information" symbols and "additional information" symbols.

GL B V 3.4 Verification of the IPC classification

As a general rule, applications will not be systematically scrutinised after leaving the search division in order to verify the correctness of the IPC classification assigned by the search division. The Office may, however, institute such sampling check procedures as are deemed necessary to ensure correctness and uniformity in the application of the IPC. It is, of course, for the line managers to arrange for such checks as they consider necessary, having regard to the experience of their members, before the applications leave their units.