About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

PCT International Search and Preliminary Examination Guidelines

PART I INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

Chapter 3 Overview of the International Preliminary Examination Stage

The International Preliminary Examination Process

Rule 66.1ter

3.16  The International Preliminary Examining Authority carries out a top-up search normally at the start of the international preliminary examination process. The main objective of the top-up search is to discover relevant documents referred to in Rule 64 that became available for search after the establishment of the international search report. No top-up search is carried out if the Authority considers that such a search would serve no useful purpose (see paragraph 19.15).

Article 34(2)

3.17  The applicant generally has the right to receive at least one written opinion, essentially directed to the questions of whether the claimed invention is novel, involves an inventive step (is non-obvious) and is industrially applicable, prior to the report being established unless the International Preliminary Examining Authority considers that all of the following criteria are fulfilled:

(i) the invention satisfies the criteria set forth in Article 33(1), that is that it appears to be novel, involve an inventive step and have industrial application, as defined for the purposes of the Treaty;

(ii) the international application complies with the requirements of the Treaty and the Regulations which are checked by the International Preliminary Examining Authority (see Rule 70.12 and Chapter 17); and

(iii) the Authority does not intend to make other permitted observations.

Article 33(6); Rules 45bis.8(c); Rule 66.1(e); Section 420

3.18  Copies of the international search report and of any supplementary international search report are transmitted by the International Bureau to the International Preliminary Examining Authority. All documents cited in the international search report and, where appropriate, the supplementary international search report are taken into consideration during the international preliminary examination, together with any other documents considered to be relevant. The International Preliminary Examining Authority is not obliged to draw up a written opinion on any claims for which an international search report has not been established. A supplementary search report need not be taken into account by the Authority for the purposes of a written opinion or the international preliminary examination report if the supplementary search report is received by the Authority after it has begun to draw up the written opinion or examination report (Rule 45bis.8(c)).

Rule 66.1bis

3.19  Furthermore, it should be noted that the written opinion established by the International Searching Authority under Rule 43bis.1 (see paragraph 2.10(i)) is usually considered to be the first written opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority for this purpose. The exception to this rule is that International Preliminary Examining Authorities may notify the International Bureau that written opinions established by specified International Searching Authorities (other than by that International Preliminary Examining Authority acting in its role as an International Searching Authority) shall not be considered to be a written opinion for this purpose. When this applies to a particular application, the Authority must notify the applicant accordingly in writing. The Authority should in any case take the International Searching Authority’s opinion into account when establishing its own written opinion.

Basis of the Written Opinion or International Preliminary Examination Report

Rule 66

3.20  The applicant is entitled to file amendments under Article 34, which will be taken into account for subsequent written opinions and the international preliminary examination report, as will any amendments which were made under Article 19, unless they are reversed or superseded by those later made under Article 34 or the applicant fails to comply with Rule 46.5(b)(iii) or Rule 66.8(a) when filing these amendments (in particular where he fails to indicate the basis for the amendments filed in the application as originally filed). The details of permissible amendments are set forth in Chapter 20 at paragraphs 20.04 et seq.

3.21  The written opinion established under Rule 43bis.1 will however include a notification including a time limit for response in the event that it is treated as the first written opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority. The consequence of this is that it will usually be necessary for amendments or arguments to be filed at the same time as the demand in order to ensure that they are taken into account during international preliminary examination.

Further Consideration

Rules 66.2, 66.4, 66.6

3.22  Where the International Preliminary Examining Authority has carried out a top-up search and intends to raise objections based on prior art documents discovered in the top-up search, a further written opinion should be issued. In other cases, the International Preliminary Examining Authority may, at its discretion, issue further written opinions provided that sufficient time is available, that the applicant makes an effort to meet the examiner’s objections and provided that the Authority has sufficient resources to provide such services. The Authority may also communicate informally with the applicant in writing, by telephone or by personal interview.