Applicant rejects amendments proposed by examining division in first Rule 71(3) communication

A second communication under Rule 71(3) is also sent if the applicant requests reversal of amendments proposed by the examining division in the first communication under Rule 71(3) and the examining division overturns its previous opinion, finding that the amendments that it had proposed were not necessary, possibly as a consequence of argumentation or evidence provided by the applicant in his reply to the first Rule 71(3) communication (in the absence of such convincing argumentation or evidence, examination will normally be resumed, see C‑V, 4.7).

Quick Navigation