2.1 Methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body 

Even where a claim is drafted as a method of medical treatment (see G‑II, 4.2) and is therefore not directed to patentable subject-matter, a meaningful search may be possible if the determinant technical feature is the effect of the substance, which can be searched. The procedure under Rule 63 (see B‑VIII, 3.1 to B-VIII, 3.4) will then be unnecessary. For example, method claims can be worded as follows:

"A method of treating dementia by administering a compound of formula X to a patient"

or

"A method of diagnosis of disease Y practised on the human/animal body, comprising steps A, B and C"

These method claims are excluded from patentability under Art. 53(c), but the applicant will usually be able to reword them in an allowable form during the examination proceedings (see G‑II, 4.2). They are therefore searched since they are usually characterised by the effect of substance X, by one or more of steps A, B and C not directly practised on the human or animal body or by the use of reagents rather than by the act of therapy or diagnosis on the human/animal body.

If, however, a claim includes specific method features (e.g. a combination of pharmaceutical and physical treatment), a meaningful search may not be possible. If in doubt, the search division will issue an invitation under Rule 63(1) (see B‑VIII, 3.1). But, regardless of whether such claims are searched or not, the applicant will be informed in the search opinion (if applicable ‒ see B‑XI, 7) that the subject-matter in question is excluded from patentability (see B‑XI, 3).