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 VI  THE INTERNATIONAL PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION STAGE (OTHER THAN THE INTERNATIONAL PRELIMINARY REPORT)

Chapter 20 Amendments

Appraisal of Amendments

Articles 5, 6, 19(2), 34(2)(b); Rule 66

20.09  The examiner makes sure that amendments filed do not add to the content of the application as filed, thus violating Article 19(2) or 34(2)(b). Furthermore, they must not itself cause the international application as amended to be objectionable under the PCT; for example, the amendment should not introduce obscurity. The examiner should consider as acceptable restriction of the scope of the claims or amendments that improve the clarity of the description or amendments to the claims in a manner clearly desirable, without changing their subject matter content or scope. An amended international application must, of course, satisfy all the requirements of the PCT including the matters listed in this chapter. However, especially when the claims have been substantially limited, the examiner should bear in mind that the following questions may require special consideration at the amendment stage:

(i) Unity of invention: Do the amended claims satisfy the requirement of Rule 13? When considering this matter, paragraphs of Chapter 10 are applicable;

(ii) Agreement of description and claims: If the claims have been amended, will the description require corresponding amendment to remove serious inconsistency between them? For example, is every embodiment of the invention described still within the scope of one or more claims? (See Chapter 5)

(iii) Conversely, are all of the amended claims supported by the description? (See paragraphs 5.43 and 5.44). Also, if the categories of claims have been altered, the examiner may draw this to the attention of the applicant if it means that the title is no longer appropriate.