MPEP § 1860 — International Preliminary Examination Procedure (Annotated Rules)

§1860 International Preliminary Examination Procedure

USPTO MPEP version: BlueIron's Update: 2025-12-31

This page consolidates and annotates all enforceable requirements under MPEP § 1860, including statutory authority, regulatory rules, examiner guidance, and practice notes. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only, it is not legal advice.

International Preliminary Examination Procedure

This section addresses International Preliminary Examination Procedure. Contains: 1 requirement, 2 guidance statements, 1 permission, and 4 other statements.

Key Rules

Topic

Article 19 Amendment Scope

2 rules
StatutoryRequiredAlways
[mpep-1860-ef08f1d0c64b5e0dfe20af65]
Examiner Must Update Previous Search and Apply New Prior Art
Note:
The examiner must review the international application, prior art documents, and search opinion to update the previous search and record any new prior art discovered.

The international preliminary examination is to be carried out in accordance with PCT Article 34 and PCT Rule 66. After the demand is checked for compliance with PCT Rules 53 – 55, 57 and 58, the first step of the examiner is to study the description, the drawings (if any), the claims of the international application, the documents describing the prior art as cited in the international search report, and the written opinion established by the International Searching Authority. Furthermore, the examiner shall search at least to the point of bringing the previous search up to date and any new prior art discovered and applied must be made of record. See PCT Rule 66.1ter.

Jump to MPEP SourceArticle 19 Amendment ScopeArticle 19 Amendment TimingPCT Description Requirements
StatutoryRecommendedAlways
[mpep-1860-1221dfc6f8564623e4b056d5]
Requirement for Further Written Opinion on Claims Lack of Novelty, Inventive Step, or Industrial Applicability
Note:
The examiner must prepare a further written opinion if the applicant argues that the International Searching Authority’s negative opinion was improper and new art necessitates re-evaluation of claims.

A further written opinion should be prepared by the examiner if applicant files a response which includes a persuasive argument that the written opinion issued by the International Searching Authority was improper because of a negative opinion with respect to a lack of novelty, inventive step (non-obviousness) or industrial applicability as described in PCT Article 33(2) – (4); and which results in the examiner considering any of the claims to lack novelty, inventive step (non-obviousness) or industrial applicability as described in PCT Article 33(2) – (4) based on new art not necessitated by any amendment.

Jump to MPEP SourceArticle 19 Amendment ScopeStatement Under Article 19International Searching Authority (ISA)
Topic

International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)

2 rules
StatutoryRecommendedAlways
[mpep-1860-d1d7168c16e48e2ac14a5538]
Written Opinion by IPEA Must Describe Defects and Findings
Note:
The International Preliminary Examining Authority must set forth any defects in the international application, negative findings on claims, form defects, or other observations as required.
Any further written opinion established by the International Preliminary Examining Authority should set forth, as applicable:
  • (A) Any defects in the international application as described in PCT Article 34(4) concerning subject matter which is not required to be examined or which is unclear or inadequately supported;
  • (B) Any negative findings with respect to any of the claims because of a lack of novelty, inventive step (non-obviousness) or industrial applicability as described in PCT Article 33(2) – (4);
  • (C) Any defects in the form or contents of the international application;
  • (D) Any finding by the examiner that an amendment goes beyond the disclosure in the international application as originally filed;
  • (E) Any observation which the examiner wishes to make on the clarity of the claims, the description, the drawings or to the question whether the claims are fully supported by the description (PCT Rule 66.2);
  • (F) Any decision by the examiner not to carry out the international preliminary examination on a claim for which no international search report was issued; or
  • (G) If the examiner considers that no acceptable nucleotide and/or amino acid sequence listing is available in a form that would allow a meaningful international preliminary examination to be carried out.
Jump to MPEP SourceInternational Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)Written Opinion of ISAArticle 19 Amendment Scope
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-5f3f402641209e37295a51ef]
Notification of Defects in International Application Required
Note:
The examiner must prepare a written opinion on Form PCT/IPEA/408 to notify the applicant about defects found in the international application and provide reasons for the opinion, inviting a written reply with possible amendments within two months.

The further written opinion is prepared on Form PCT/IPEA/408 to notify applicant of the defects found in the international application. The examiner is further required to fully state the reasons for the opinion (PCT Rule 66.2(b)) and invite a written reply, with amendments where appropriate (PCT Rule 66.2(c)), normally setting a 2 month time limit for the reply.

Jump to MPEP SourceInternational Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)Request Content and FormSignature Requirements
Topic

Statutory Authority for Examination

2 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-25e0791221a72637b862d7a8]
Permitted for International Preliminary Examination
Note:
A second written opinion may be issued if sufficient time is available, allowing amendments that improve the application's condition for examination.

The U.S. Rules of Practice pertaining to international preliminary examination of international applications permit a second written opinion in those cases where sufficient time is available. Normally only one written opinion will be issued. Any reply received after the expiration of the set time limit will not normally be considered in preparing the international preliminary examination report. In situations, however, where the examiner has requested an amendment or where a later amendment places the application in better condition for examination, the amendment may be considered by the examiner.

Jump to MPEP SourceStatutory Authority for ExaminationExamination ProceduresAmendments Adding New Matter
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-dbdd6cfa6ca40b249f539fe6]
Reply After Time Limit Not Considered
Note:
Replies received after the set time limit will not be considered in preparing the international preliminary examination report.

The U.S. Rules of Practice pertaining to international preliminary examination of international applications permit a second written opinion in those cases where sufficient time is available. Normally only one written opinion will be issued. Any reply received after the expiration of the set time limit will not normally be considered in preparing the international preliminary examination report. In situations, however, where the examiner has requested an amendment or where a later amendment places the application in better condition for examination, the amendment may be considered by the examiner.

Jump to MPEP SourceStatutory Authority for ExaminationAmendments Adding New MatterOptional Amendment Content
Topic

Amendments Adding New Matter

2 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-bfbd6bb04ddb7e774f35baaa]
Normally Only One Written Opinion Will Be Issued
Note:
The rule states that typically only one written opinion will be issued during the international preliminary examination of an application, unless additional amendments improve the condition for examination.

The U.S. Rules of Practice pertaining to international preliminary examination of international applications permit a second written opinion in those cases where sufficient time is available. Normally only one written opinion will be issued. Any reply received after the expiration of the set time limit will not normally be considered in preparing the international preliminary examination report. In situations, however, where the examiner has requested an amendment or where a later amendment places the application in better condition for examination, the amendment may be considered by the examiner.

Jump to MPEP SourceAmendments Adding New MatterOptional Amendment ContentAmendments to Application
StatutoryPermittedAlways
[mpep-1860-decd3b963bbf00c601fdce1d]
Amendments Placed in Better Condition for Examination Allowed
Note:
If the examiner requests an amendment or a later amendment improves the application, it may be considered by the examiner.

The U.S. Rules of Practice pertaining to international preliminary examination of international applications permit a second written opinion in those cases where sufficient time is available. Normally only one written opinion will be issued. Any reply received after the expiration of the set time limit will not normally be considered in preparing the international preliminary examination report. In situations, however, where the examiner has requested an amendment or where a later amendment places the application in better condition for examination, the amendment may be considered by the examiner.

Jump to MPEP SourceAmendments Adding New MatterOptional Amendment ContentAmendments to Application
Topic

Article 34 Amendments

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-261c66c89a70ee10e6e59578]
International Preliminary Examination Procedure According to PCT Rules
Note:
The international preliminary examination must follow PCT Article 34 and Rule 66, including studying the application's description, drawings, claims, prior art documents, and updating any previous search findings.

The international preliminary examination is to be carried out in accordance with PCT Article 34 and PCT Rule 66. After the demand is checked for compliance with PCT Rules 53 – 55, 57 and 58, the first step of the examiner is to study the description, the drawings (if any), the claims of the international application, the documents describing the prior art as cited in the international search report, and the written opinion established by the International Searching Authority. Furthermore, the examiner shall search at least to the point of bringing the previous search up to date and any new prior art discovered and applied must be made of record. See PCT Rule 66.1ter.

Jump to MPEP SourceArticle 34 AmendmentsInternational Preliminary Examination (Chapter II)National Stage Examination
Topic

Patent Cooperation Treaty

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-88d834768021e5f897023f9f]
Examiner Must Update Prior Art Search
Note:
The examiner is required to update the prior art search and record any new prior art discovered during the international preliminary examination.

The international preliminary examination is to be carried out in accordance with PCT Article 34 and PCT Rule 66. After the demand is checked for compliance with PCT Rules 53 – 55, 57 and 58, the first step of the examiner is to study the description, the drawings (if any), the claims of the international application, the documents describing the prior art as cited in the international search report, and the written opinion established by the International Searching Authority. Furthermore, the examiner shall search at least to the point of bringing the previous search up to date and any new prior art discovered and applied must be made of record. See PCT Rule 66.1ter.

Jump to MPEP SourcePatent Cooperation TreatyArticle 19 Amendment ScopeArticle 19 Amendment Timing
Topic

Sequence Listing Content

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1860-9ce46e699bc054cd15508aeb]
Sequence Listing Required for Examination
Note:
The International Preliminary Examining Authority must state if no acceptable sequence listing is available for meaningful examination.

Any further written opinion established by the International Preliminary Examining Authority should set forth, as applicable:

(G) If the examiner considers that no acceptable nucleotide and/or amino acid sequence listing is available in a form that would allow a meaningful international preliminary examination to be carried out.

Jump to MPEP SourceSequence Listing ContentSequence Listing FormatSequence Listing Requirements
Topic

Interviews in National Stage

1 rules
StatutoryRequiredAlways
[mpep-1860-42fc51ecb3f727d2beab4251]
Examiner Must State Reasons and Invite Reply with Amendments
Note:
The examiner must provide full reasons for the opinion and invite a written reply, including possible amendments, within two months.

The further written opinion is prepared on Form PCT/IPEA/408 to notify applicant of the defects found in the international application. The examiner is further required to fully state the reasons for the opinion (PCT Rule 66.2(b)) and invite a written reply, with amendments where appropriate (PCT Rule 66.2(c)), normally setting a 2 month time limit for the reply.

Jump to MPEP SourceInterviews in National StagePatent Cooperation TreatyArticle 34 Amendments

Citations

Primary topicCitation
Article 19 Amendment Scope
International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)
PCT Article 33(2)
Article 19 Amendment Scope
Article 34 Amendments
International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)
Patent Cooperation Treaty
PCT Article 34(4)
Article 19 Amendment Scope
Article 34 Amendments
Patent Cooperation Treaty
PCT Rules 53
Article 19 Amendment Scope
Article 34 Amendments
International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)
Interviews in National Stage
Patent Cooperation Treaty
PCT Rule 66.2(c)

Source Text from USPTO’s MPEP

This is an exact copy of the MPEP from the USPTO. It is here for your reference to see the section in context.

BlueIron Last Updated: 2025-12-31