The communication under Rule 71(3) (see VI, 2.5 and VI, 14.1 to VI, 14.3) does not constitute an opportunity for the applicant to call into question the outcome of the earlier procedure. At this stage of the proceedings, the substantive examination has already been completed and the applicant has had the opportunity to amend the application and therefore normally only those amendments which do not appreciably delay the preparations for grant of the patent will be admitted under Rule 137(3). It is, however, appropriate to admit separate sets of claims for one or more designated States that made a reservation under Art. 167(2) EPC 1973 (see III, 8.3) or for which prior national rights exist (see III, 8.4).

If, on reviewing the proposed text for grant, the applicant wishes to make minor amendments and/or corrections, he should file them, together with a translation of the claims as amended and/or corrected, and should pay the fees for grant and printing within the period set under Rule 71(3), as required by Rule 71(4). If the amendments and/or corrections do not relate to the claims, then translations of the claims as in the communication under Rule 71(3) should be filed. Failure to file the translations or pay the fees within this time limit will result in the application being deemed withdrawn, in accordance with Rule 71(7). The three situations specified in VI, 14.4.1 in which this requirement does not apply (maintenance of a higher request, maintenance of the existing request without the amendments made by the Examining Division in the communication under Rule 71(3) and the issuing of the communication under Rule 71(3) on the basis of the wrong documents) should be noted.

If, under Rule 137(3), the Examining Division consents to the amendments and/or corrections and considers them allowable, it can immediately proceed to grant pursuant to Art. 97(1).

If, however, a request for amendment is to be refused under Rule 137(3), the applicant must first in compliance with Rule 71(5) and Art. 113(1) be sent a communication giving the reasons for refusing the amendment and giving him the opportunity to either withdraw his request for amendment or submit his observations and any amendments considered necessary by the Examining Division and, where the claims are amended, a translation of the claims as amended.

If the applicant maintains his request for the amendment, and the Examining Division sees no reason to change its opinion not to consent to the amendments pursuant to Rule 137(3), the application must be refused under Art. 97(2), since, in these circumstances, there is no text of the application which has been agreed by the applicant and allowed by the Examining Division (Art. 113(2)).

It should be noted that if no communication under Art. 94(3) has preceded the communication under Rule 71(3), the latter is a "first communication" within the meaning of Rule 137(3). This means that the applicant may amend the description, claims and drawings of his own volition (see VI, 3.3 for the conditions any amendment must satisfy). The provisions of Rule 71(4) concerning the filing of translations of the amended claims and payment of fees nonetheless still apply in this case, unless the applicant's response corresponds to one of the exceptions defined in VI, 14.4.1. In these circumstances however, if the Examining Division is of the opinion that the amendments are inadmissible or not allowable, then the examination procedure should normally be resumed in accordance with VI, 14.5. As in the cases referred to in VI, 4.11, if this leads to a version which meets the requirements of the EPC, a second communication under Rule 71(3) is issued. An exception to this procedure would be when the objections of the Examining Division are of a relatively minor nature, such that they could be resolved by means of a telephone conversation, in which case resumption of the examination procedure would be unnecessary.