For each objection the search opinion should indicate the part of the application which is deficient and the requirement of the EPC which is not met, either by referring to specific articles or rules, or by other clear indication; it should also give the reason for any objection where this is not immediately apparent. For example, where prior art is cited and only part of a cited document is relevant, the particular passage relied upon should be identified. If the cited prior art is such as to demonstrate lack of novelty or inventive step in the independent claim or claims, and if, consequently, there is lack of unity between dependent claims (see F‑V, 9), the applicant should be informed of this situation (see H‑IV, 4.2(i)). Substantive matters should normally be set out first. The search opinion should be drafted in such a manner as to facilitate later examination of the amended application and, in particular, to avoid the need for extensive rereading (see C‑IV, 2).
In general, all claims should be referred to, and all documents cited as "X" or "Y" against certain claims should be referred to in the search opinion with a corresponding objection. In the case of dependent claims, while detailed reasoning may not always be necessary in the search opinion, it should at least be apparent what the reason for the objection is.