4.9 Reply explicitly disapproving with the proposed text without indicating an alternative text 

If the applicant replies to the communication under Rule 71(3) by simply disapproving with the text proposed for grant, not indicating an alternative and not paying any fees or filing the translations of the claims, the following will apply:

(1)If the text proposed for grant was based on the main request submitted by the applicant (without any amendments or corrections proposed by the examining division), the application will be refused, provided that at least one communication in examination proceedings has been sent (see C‑III, 4 and E‑IX, 4.1) and the applicant's right to oral proceedings is respected (Art. 116(1)) the criteria in C‑V, 4.7.1 are met. The basis for the refusal in this case is the absence of an application text agreed to by the applicant (Art. 113(2)).

(2)If amendments or corrections were proposed by the division in the Rule 71(3) communication, the applicant's disagreement is interpreted as a rejection of the proposal and the procedure continues as described in C‑V, 4.6.1.

(3)If the communication under Rule 71(3) was based on an auxiliary request, the applicant's disagreement is interpreted as a request to base the grant on a higher-ranking request. The procedure continues as described in C‑V, 4.6.2 and 4.7.1.1. If it is not clear which higher-ranking request the applicant wishes to pursue, the examining division must request clarification of this in resumed examination proceedings.

If the applicant first files only their disagreement with the text and then (still within the Rule 71(3) period) a request for amendment or correction, this is interpreted as a desire to proceed with the application as amended or corrected. The procedure in C‑V, 4 applies.