6.3 Conflict between abstract and source document 

Where there is a problem with an abstract, either because it appears to conflict with its source document or because it conflicts with other abstracts of the same source document, the search division will proceed as follows:

(i)it will cite the source document if it is in a language it can readily understand (especially one of an EPC contracting state) and either directly available to it or easy to obtain. 

(ii)it will cite the abstract if the source document is in a language it cannot readily understand (e.g. Russian, Japanese, Korean or Chinese) and/or is difficult to obtain. If more than one abstract is available, it will cite the one most relevant to the claimed invention even if it conflicts with the other abstracts or the source document. 

The source document will be mentioned in the search report as the "&" document of the cited abstract. Where it is available but is in a language the search division cannot readily understand (e.g. Japanese), both it and the abstract will be made available to the applicant and included in the file (see B‑X, 9.1.2). The search division must explain in the search opinion why it thinks there is a conflict.

Where an abstract conflicts with the source document to such an extent that it is incorrect, it is not treated as prior art, and the source document is considered to be the state of the art instead (T 77/87). However, for the purposes of the search report and opinion, an abstract is assumed to truly reflect the source document's content unless the discrepancy between the two is obvious. Since the abstract, the source document and a machine translation of the source document are all made available (see B‑X, 9.1.3 and B-X, 12), the applicant can compare their disclosures and form an opinion on whether the abstract is technically accurate. They will still have an opportunity to refute the above assumption at the examination stage (e.g. by providing a translation of the source document).