You are here:  Ed9 08.2017 Guidebook  » Chapter 1800

1878 Preparation of the Written Opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority

MPEP SECTION SUMMARY

A written opinion must be prepared by the International Searching Authority at the same time the international search report is prepared.

The United States International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA/US) will consider the written opinion of the International Searching Authority to be the first written opinion of the IPEA and as such in most instances no further written opinion need be issued by the U.S. examiner handling the international preliminary examination before establishment of the international preliminary examination report, even if there are objections outstanding.

 

*****
(2) *****

(c) The applicant shall receive at least one written opinion from the International Preliminary Examining Authority unless such Authority considers that all of the following conditions are fulfilled:

(i) the invention satisfies the criteria set forth in Article 33(1),
(ii) the international application complies with the requirements of this Treaty and the Regulations in so far as checked by that Authority,
(iii) no observations are intended to be made under Article 35(2), last sentence.

*****

(a) An international preliminary examination will be conducted to formulate a non-binding opinion as to whether the claimed invention has novelty, involves an inventive step (is non-obvious) and is industrially applicable.
(b) International preliminary examination will begin in accordance with PCT Rule 69.1.
(c) No international preliminary examination will be conducted on inventions not previously searched by an International Searching Authority.
(d) The International Preliminary Examining Authority will establish a written opinion if any defect exists or if the claimed invention lacks novelty, inventive step or industrial applicability and will set a non-extendable time limit in the written opinion for the applicant to reply.
(e) The written opinion established by the International Searching Authority under PCT Rule 43bis.1 shall be considered to be a written opinion of the United States International Preliminary Examining Authority for the purposes of paragraph (d) of this section.
(f) The International Preliminary Examining Authority may establish further written opinions under paragraph (d) of this section.
(g) If no written opinion under paragraph (d) of this section is necessary, or if no further written opinion under paragraph (f) of this section is to be established, or after any written opinion and the reply thereto or the expiration of the time limit for reply to such written opinion, an international preliminary examination report will be established by the International Preliminary Examining Authority. One copy will be submitted to the International Bureau and one copy will be submitted to the applicant.
(h) An applicant will be permitted a personal or telephone interview with the examiner, which may be requested after the filing of a Demand, and must be conducted during the period between the establishment of the written opinion and the establishment of the international preliminary examination report. Additional interviews may be conducted where the examiner determines that such additional interviews may be helpful to advancing the international preliminary examination procedure. A summary of any such personal or telephone interview must be filed by the applicant or, if not filed by applicant be made of record in the file by the examiner.
(i) If the application whose priority is claimed in the international application is in a language other than English, the United States International Preliminary Examining Authority may, where the validity of the priority claim is relevant for the formulation of the opinion referred to in Article 33(1), invite the applicant to furnish an English translation of the priority document within two months from the date of the invitation. If the translation is not furnished within that time limit, the international preliminary report may be established as if the priority had not been claimed.

PCT Rule 66. Procedure Before the International Preliminary Examining Authority

*****
(a) Subject to paragraph (b), the written opinion established by the International Searching Authority under Rule 43bis.1 shall be considered to be a written opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority for the purposes of Rule 66.2(a).

*****

The International Preliminary Examining Authority shall conduct a search ("top-up search") to discover documents referred to in Rule 64 which have been published or have become available to the said Authority for search subsequent to the date on which the international search report was established, unless it considers that such a search would serve no useful purpose. If the Authority finds that any of the situations referred to in Article 34(3) or (4) or Rule 66.1(e) exists, the top-up search shall cover only those parts of the international application that are the subject of international preliminary examination.

*****

(a) If the International Preliminary Examining Authority wishes to issue one or more additional written opinions, it may do so, and Rules 66.2 and 66.3 shall apply.

*****

 

1878.01(a) Prior Art for Purposes of the Written Opinion and the International Preliminary Examination Report

MPEP SECTION SUMMARY

The relevant date for the purpose of considering prior art is defined in PCT Rule 64.1(b) as:
• (A) the international filing date (subject to (B) and (C));
• (B) where the international application claims the priority of an earlier application and has an international filing date which is within the priority period, the filing date of such earlier application, unless the Authority considers that the priority claim is not valid;
• (C) where the international application claims the priority of an earlier application and has an international filing date which is later than the date on which the priority period expired but within the period of two months from that date, the filing date of such earlier application, unless the Authority considers that the priority claim is not valid for reasons other than the fact that the international application has an international filing date which is later than the date on which the priority period expired.

 

*****
(6) The international preliminary examination shall take into consideration all the documents cited in the international search report. It may take into consideration any additional documents considered to be relevant in the particular case.


PCT Rule 64. Prior Art for International Preliminary Examination

(a) For the purposes of Article 33(2) and (3), everything made available to the public anywhere in the world by means of written disclosure (including drawings and other illustrations) shall be considered prior art provided that such making available occurred prior to the relevant date.
(b) For the purposes of paragraph (a), the relevant date shall be:

(i) subject to items (ii) and (iii), the international filing date of the international application under international preliminary examination;
(ii) where the international application under international preliminary examination claims the priority of an earlier application and has an international filing date which is within the priority period, the filing date of such earlier application, unless the International Preliminary Examining Authority considers that the priority claim is not valid;
(iii) where the international application under international preliminary examination claims the priority of an earlier application and has an international filing date which is later than the date on which the priority period expired but within the period of two months from that date, the filing date of such earlier application, unless the International Preliminary Examining Authority considers that the priority claim is not valid for reasons other than the fact that the international application has an international filing date which is later than the date on which the priority period expired.

In cases where the making available to the public occurred by means of an oral disclosure, use, exhibition or other non-written means (“non-written disclosure”) before the relevant date as defined in Rule 64.1(b) and the date of such non-written disclosure is indicated in a written disclosure which has been made available to the public on a date which is the same as, or later than, the relevant date, the non-written disclosure shall not be considered part of the prior art for the purposes of Article 33(2) and (3). Nevertheless, the international preliminary examination report shall call attention to such non-written disclosure in the manner provided for in Rule 70.9.

In cases where any application or any patent which would constitute prior art for the purposes of Article 33(2) and (3) had it been published prior to the relevant date referred to in Rule 64.1 was published on a date which is the same as, or later than, the relevant date but was filed earlier than the relevant date or claimed the priority of an earlier application which had been filed prior to the relevant date, such published application or patent shall not be considered part of the prior art for the purposes of Article 33(2) and (3). Nevertheless, the international preliminary examination report shall call attention to such application or patent in the manner provided for in Rule 70.10.


1878.02 Reply to the Written Opinion of the ISA or IPEA

MPEP SECTION SUMMARY

A reply to the written opinion of the ISA in the form of arguments and/or amendments will be considered by the IPEA if a demand has been filed with the IPEA. All amendments in reply to a written opinion must be received within the time limit set for reply in order to be assured of consideration in the international preliminary examination report. Amendments filed at or before expiration of the period for reply will be considered.

In view of the short time period for completion of preliminary examination, applicants are strongly encouraged to file any amendments promptly. There are no extensions of time to reply to a written opinion. Further details on replying to a written opinion are covered here.

 

*****
(2) (d) The applicant may respond to the written opinion.

*****

PCT Rule 66. Procedure before the International Preliminary Examining Authority

(a) The applicant may respond to the invitation referred to in Rule 66.2(c) of the International Preliminary Examining Authority by making amendments or - if he disagrees with the opinion of that Authority - by submitting arguments, as the case may be, or do both.
(b) Any response shall be submitted directly to the International Preliminary Examining Authority.

*****

Amendments, arguments and rectifications of obvious mistakes need not be taken into account by the International Preliminary Examining Authority for the purposes of a written opinion or the international preliminary examination report if they are received by, authorized by or notified to that Authority, as applicable, after it has begun to draw up that opinion or report.

Any change, other than the rectification of an obvious mistake, in the claims, the description, or the drawings, including cancellation of claims, omission of passages in the description, or omission of certain drawings, shall be considered an amendment.

The International Preliminary Examining Authority may, at any time, communicate informally, over the telephone, in writing, or through personal interviews, with the applicant. The said Authority shall, at its discretion, decide whether it wishes to grant more than one personal interview if so requested by the applicant, or whether it wishes to reply to any informal written communication from the applicant.

*****

(a) Subject to paragraph (b), when amending the description or the drawings, the applicant shall be required to submit a replacement sheet for every sheet of the international application which, on account of an amendment, differs from the sheet previously filed. The replacement sheet or sheets shall be accompanied by a letter which shall draw attention to the differences between the replaced sheets and the replacement sheets, shall indicate the basis for the amendment in the application as filed and shall preferably also explain the reasons for the amendment.
(b) Where the amendment consists in the deletion of passages or in minor alterations or additions, the replacement sheet referred to in paragraph (a) may be a copy of the relevant sheet of the international application containing the alterations or additions, provided that the clarity and direct reproducibility of that sheet are not adversely affected. To the extent that any amendment results in the cancellation of an entire sheet, that amendment shall be communicated in a letter which shall preferably also explain the reasons for the amendment.
(c) When amending the claims, Rule 46.5 shall apply mutatis mutandis. The set of claims submitted under Rule 46.5 as applicable by virtue of this paragraph shall replace all the claims originally filed or previously amended under Articles 19 or 34, as the case may be.

The applicant may make amendments at the time of filing the Demand. The applicant may also make amendments within the time limit set by the International Preliminary Examining Authority for reply to any notification under § 1.484(b) or to any written opinion. Any such amendments must be made in accordance with PCT Rule 66.8.

Any amendments to the description and the drawings in reply to a written opinion must:

  • (1) be made by submitting a replacement sheet for every sheet of the application which differs from the sheet it replaces unless an entire sheet is cancelled and
  • (2) include a description of how the replacement sheet differs from the replaced sheet.

Any amendment to the claims in reply to a written opinion must be made by submitting a replacement sheet or sheets containing a complete set of claims in replacement of all the claims originally filed or previously amended under Articles 19 or 34, as the case may be in accordance with PCT Rule 66.8.

The replacement sheet or sheets shall be accompanied by a letter which:

  • (i) shall identify the claims which, on account of the amendments, differ from the claims originally filed, and shall draw attention to the differences between the claims originally filed and the claims as amended;
  • (ii) shall identify the claims originally filed which, on account of the amendments, are cancelled;
  • (iii) shall indicate the basis for the amendments in the application as filed.

Any paper submitted by the applicant, if not in the form of a letter, must be accompanied by a letter signed by the applicant or agent.

  • The letter must draw attention to the differences between the replaced sheet and the replacement sheet.

INTERVIEWS

The examiner or applicant may, after the filing of a demand and during the time limit for reply to the written opinion, request a telephone or personal interview.

  • Only one interview is a matter of right, whether by telephone or in person.
  • Additional interviews may be authorized by the examiner in a particular international application where such additional interview may be helpful to advance the international preliminary examination procedure.

When an interview is arranged, whether by telephone or in writing, and whether by the examiner or by the applicant, the matters for discussion should be stated.

 

» 1879 Preparation of the international preliminary examination report