3.4 Scope of first analysis for generally deficient applications 

Where an application is found to be generally deficient, the search division does not analyse it in detail, but sends the applicant a search opinion informing them of its view, mentioning the major deficiencies and saying that, when the application moves on to the examination stage, further examination will be deferred until the application has been amended to overcome them. There are cases where, although a meaningful analysis is possible, a fundamental objection arises, e.g. it is clear that certain claims lack novelty and that the statement of claim will have to be drastically recast, or there are substantial amendments (to an international application entering the European phase – see B‑XI, 2) which are not allowable either because they add new subject-matter that was not in the application as filed (Art. 123(2)) or because they introduce other deficiencies (e.g. the amendment makes the claims unclear – Art. 84). It may then be more appropriate to deal with this objection before making a detailed analysis. For instance, if the claims need to be recast, it may not make sense to object to the clarity of some dependent claims or to a passage in the description which may anyway have to be amended or even deleted in examination proceedings as a result. However, if there are other major objections, these should be addressed. Generally speaking, the search division should try to deal with as many deficiencies as possible in the search opinion to help make the decision-making process in the later examination proceedings as efficient as possible. As regards positive statements on patentability in the search opinion, see B‑XI, 3.2.2.