About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

PCT International Search and Preliminary Examination Guidelines

PART III EXAMINER CONSIDERATIONS COMMON TO BOTH THE INTERNATIONAL SEARCHING AUTHORITY AND THE INTERNATIONAL PRELIMINARY EXAMINING AUTHORITY

Chapter 11 Prior Art

Documents Not Within the Prior Art Which May Nevertheless Be Relevant

Later Published Patent Applications (for Purposes of the International Search Report)

Rule 33.1(c)

11.07  Furthermore, the international search report includes published patent applications or patents whose publication date is the same as, or later than, but whose filing date, or, where applicable, claimed priority date, is earlier than the international filing date of the international application searched, and which would constitute relevant prior art for the purposes of Article 15(2) had they been published prior to the international filing date.

Later Published Patent Applications (for Purposes of International Preliminary Examination)

Rule 64.3

11.08  These earlier filed but later published patent applications or patents are not considered part of the prior art for the purpose of international preliminary examination as to novelty and inventive step. Nevertheless, the written opinion of the International Searching Authority and the preliminary examination report must draw attention to such published applications or patents in the manner provided for in Rule 70.10 (see paragraph 17.45) since they may be relevant to the determination of novelty and inventive step by designated or elected Offices.

11.09  Rule 70.10 provides that any published application or any patent referred to in the international preliminary examination report by virtue of Rule 64.3 is mentioned as such and is accompanied by an indication of its date of publication, of its filing date, and its claimed priority date (if any). In respect of the priority date of any such document, the report may indicate that, in the opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority, such date has not been validly claimed.

Copending Applications, Including Those Filed on the Same Date

11.10  The PCT does not deal explicitly with the case of co-pending international applications of the same date. However, it is an accepted principle in most patent granting systems that two patents shall not be granted to the same applicant for one invention. It is permissible to allow an applicant to proceed with two international applications having the same description where the claims are quite distinct in scope and directed to different subject matter. However, in the rare case in which there are two or more international applications from the same applicant designating the same State or States and the claims of those applications have the same priority date and relate to the same invention (even though they may not necessarily claim that invention in identical terms), each conflicting application should (as long as it has already been published) be cited in the international search report and identified with a “L” category symbol as raising possible double patenting issues. A notification, to the applicant alone, is given in the case where his international application designates a State in which he proceeds with a national application having the same priority date and relating to the same invention as the said international application, if the examiner is aware of this situation. However, no such notification should be given where two applications (international or otherwise) of the same priority date and relating to the same invention are received from two different applicants.

Documents Relevant to Understanding the Invention

Section 507(e)

11.11  Certain other situations may occur in which a document published on or after the international filing date is relevant; examples are a later document containing the principle or theory underlying the invention, which may be useful for a better understanding of the invention, or a later document showing that the reasoning or the facts underlying the invention are incorrect. The international search is not extended for this purpose, but documents of this nature known to the search examiner may be selected for citation in the international search report. Such documents are cited in the international search report and their relevance explained in the written opinion.