The Subject Patent Already Has Underlining or ... - Bayhdolecentral

1879 MANUAL OFPATENT EXAMlNlNGPROCEDURE
In the particular case where the amendment cancels
claims, passages in the description or certain drawings
resulting in the cancellation of an entire sheet, the
amendment must be submitted in the form of a letter
cancelling the sheet (PCT Rule 66.8(a)).
Replacement sheets must be in typed form.
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 (PCT Rule 92.1). The
letter must draw attention to the differences between
the replaced sheet and the replacement sheet.
The examiner should make sure that amendments
filed in accordance with the PCT, which are necessary
to correct any deficiencies notified to the applicant, do
not go beyond the disclosure of the international
application as filed, thus violating PCT Article
34(2)(b). In.other words, no amendment should contain
matter that cannot be substantiated by the application
as originally filed. In a situation .where new
matter is introduced by amendment.in reply to a written
opinion, the international preliminary examination
report will be established as if the amendment had not
been made, and the report should so indicate. It shall
also indicate the reasons why. the amendment goes
beyond the disclosure (PCT Rule 70.2(c)).
INTERVIEWS
The examiner or applicant may, 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.
All interviews of substance must be made of record
by using PCT/IPEAl428 Notice on Informal Communication
with the Applicant.
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.
The records of interviews or telephone .conversations
should indicate, where appropriate, whether a
reply is due from the applicant or agent or whether the
examiner wishes to issue an additional written opin-
August2001
1800-114
ion or establish the international preliminary examination
report.
If the applicant desires to reply to the written opinion,
such reply must be filed within the time limit set
for reply in order to assure consideration. No extensions
to the time limit will be considered or granted. If
no timely reply is received from the applicant, the
international preliminary examination report will be
established by the examiner, treating each claim substantially
as it was treated in the written opinion.
Replies to the written opinion which are not filed
within the time limit set but which reach the examiner
before the examiner takes up the application for preparation
of the final report may be considered. Thus,
only timely replies can be assured of consideration.
The applicant may reply to the invitation referred to
in Rule 66.2(c) by making amendments or, if the
applicant disagrees with the opinion of the authority,
by submitting arguments, as the case may be, or both
(peT Rule 66.3).
If applicant does not reply to the written opinion,
the international preliminary examination report will
be prepared in time for forwardingto the International
Division in finished form by 27 months from the priority
date.
1879 Preparation of the International
Preliminary Examination Report
retArticle 35.
The International Preliminary Examination Report
(1) The international preliminary examination report shallbe
established within the prescribed time limit andin the prescribed
form.
(2) The international preliminary examination report shall
not contain any statement on the question whether the claimed
invention is or seems to be patentable or unpatentable according
to any national law. It shall state,subjectto the provisions of paragraph
(3), in relationto each claim, whetherthe claim appears to
satisfy the criteria of novelty, inventive step (non-obviousness),
and industrial applicability, as defined for the purposes of the
international preliminary examinationin Article 33(1) to·(4). The
statement shall be accompanied by the citation of the documents
believed to support the stated conclusion with such explanations
as the circumstances of the case may require. The statement shall
also be accompanied by such other observation as the Regulations
provide for.
(3)(a)If, at the time of establishing the international preliminaryexaminationreport,
the International Preliminary Examining
Authority considersthatany of the situations referred to in Article
34(4)(a) exists, thatreport shall state this opinion andthe reasons