What are the key components of a further written opinion in international preliminary examination?
A further written opinion issued during international preliminary examination should address several key points. The MPEP outlines these components: Defects in the application as described in PCT Article 34(4) Negative findings on novelty, inventive step, or industrial applicability Defects in form or contents of the application Amendments that go beyond the original disclosure Observations on…
Read MoreWhat is the international preliminary examination procedure?
The international preliminary examination is conducted according to PCT Article 34 and PCT Rule 66. The MPEP states: The examiner takes into consideration any comments or amendments made by the applicant when establishing the international preliminary examination report. This process involves studying the application’s description, drawings, claims, prior art cited in the international search report,…
Read MoreWhen is a further written opinion issued during international preliminary examination?
A further written opinion should be issued when: The applicant provides a persuasive argument that the written opinion from the International Searching Authority was improper regarding novelty, inventive step, or industrial applicability. The examiner considers any claims to lack novelty, inventive step, or industrial applicability based on new art not necessitated by amendments. According to…
Read MoreWhat happens if PCT Article 34 amendments are not properly filed?
What happens if PCT Article 34 amendments are not properly filed? Improperly filed PCT Article 34 amendments can have significant consequences. The MPEP 1864.01 provides guidance on this issue: “If the applicant files an amendment with the demand (PCT Article 34), the amendment shall be referred to in the appropriate place in the report (PCT…
Read More