3.2.2 Reply in time 

If applicants reply to the invitation under Rule 63(1) in time and the search division considers it possible to carry out a meaningful search based on the subject-matter they have indicated, it will search that subject-matter.

If applicants reply to the invitation under Rule 63(1) in time but the indicated subject-matter still cannot be fully searched, the search division will take its own decision on what to search, but will keep to what was indicated in the applicant's reply as far as possible. In exceptional cases, it may find that no meaningful search is possible at all.

Statements consisting of reworded claims filed in reply to an invitation under Rule 63(1) are not considered amended claims within the meaning of Rule 137(1) but treated merely as explanations of the originally filed claims. The applicant must formally introduce these reworded claims into the proceedings by confirming that this is what they want within the time limit under Rule 70(1) or (2). The confirmation can be filed either together with the reply to the extended European search report (Rules 70a(1) and Rule 70a(2)) or, where applicable, when complying with the requirements under Rule 70(1) or (2). As far as possible, the search division will draw up the search report in the light of these explanations. Both the search report and the search opinion must clearly indicate what has been searched.

Instead of indicating the subject-matter to be searched, applicants can reply to the invitation under Rule 63(1) by simply arguing why they believe a meaningful search can be carried out on all of the subject-matter claimed. If the search division is convinced by the applicant's arguments, it will issue a full search report. The search will therefore not be limited and there will be none of the associated consequences in examination. But if it is not convinced, or is only partially convinced, it will take its own decision on what to search and then issue a partial search report or, in exceptional cases, a declaration of no search. The examining division has final responsibility for deciding whether it was appropriate to send an invitation under Rule 63 and issue a declaration of no search or a partial search report at the search stage and it may find that it has to carry out an additional search (see C‑IV, 7.3).

Applicants can also reply to an invitation under Rule 63 by arguing against the findings there and ‒ as a main request ‒ asking the search division to fully search the claims as filed and ‒ as an alternative, in case the search division is still not convinced ‒ indicating specific subject-matter they would like to have searched (see also H‑III, 3.2).

A consultation may take place if the applicant phones the search division to enquire about the course of action after an invitation under Rule 63 has been sent. The consultation is limited to formal issues concerning the content of the invitation and the options available to the applicant. The search division writes minutes of the consultation and sends them to the applicant (without setting any time limit) for information only. The consultation itself does not count as a valid reply to the invitation and so the applicant still has to file a written reply within the time limit set there.