6.3.4.1 Demand and Top-up Search

Date Published

On this page

Requirement for a top-up search and exceptions

The International Preliminary Examining Authority is required to conduct a top-up search for every case on which a Demand has been filed, unless it is considered that the proposed search would ’serve no useful purpose’. This exception applies where:

  • Any prior art that might be found would be superfluous in light of the documents already identified.

  • The art to which the application relates is such that the finding of better citations is considered very unlikely.

Note: For cases where the demand was filed on or after 1 July 2014, a top-up search would be conducted only once before carrying out the International Examination. No top-up search is required to be conducted for cases where the Demand for International Preliminary Examination was filed prior to 1 July 2014.

The examiner conducting the international preliminary examination has the primary responsibility to decide whether to carry out a top-search.

Examiners should base their decision mainly on the results of the International Search and their knowledge of the technology in question. 

If the International Search has already discovered category X citations against most of the claims, there may be little benefit in conducting a top-up search. A top-up search may also not be appropriate for slow changing technologies. 

On the other hand, if the documents found during the International Search are category A only or the technology in question is fast changing, a top-up search may discover relevant citations. 

If the examiner decides against conducting a top-up search for a particular case, they should confirm their decision by discussing with a Senior Examiner. The examiner should then record their decision by adding a case note to the RIO case file (see RIO - Creating case notes). Detailed reasoning is not required.

The objective of a top-up search is to discover prior art which was published after the date of International Search and is relevant to the determination of whether the claimed invention is lacking in novelty or an inventive step.

Examiners should perform top-up searching predominantly by using the earlier search strategy, focusing on the period one month prior to the date of International Search until the date of filing the demand.

There is no requirement to form a 3-person search team for conducting a top-up search.

Note: A top-up search should not be confused with an additional search which is conducted when an earlier search is considered to be inadequate and/or the scope of the claims has changed substantially due to amendments. In most cases, an additional search would require the formation of a 3-person team.

Completing SIS, Written Opinion-IPEO, and IPRPII

A Search Information Statement (SIS) is required to be completed whenever a top-up search is carried out regardless of the relevance of the documents discovered in the search.

Where a top-up search has been performed using the earlier search strategy either directly or by a simple modification thereof, a truncated SIS may be completed rather than a complete SIS.

A truncated SIS will identify the nature of the search strategy performed by:

  • referring to the earlier SIS

  • describing any modifications to the search terms

  • indicating the restricted period of the top-up search. 

Answering the relevant questions in RIO will automatically generate a truncated SIS with the required information.

Indicating whether a top-up search has been done

When completing the Written Opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority (Form PCT/IPEA/408), it is not required to indicate that a top-up search has been conducted. However, if any useful documents are found in the top-search, they must be raised in Box V of the opinion as new citations.

When completing the International Preliminary Report on Patentability Chapter 2 (Form PCT/IPEA/409), Item 6 of Box 1 should be completed to indicate whether a top-up search was carried out by the examining authority and whether any relevant documents were discovered in that search.

Note: Where a top-up or additional search is conducted and a Search Information Statement (SIS) generated with the second opinion, no further SIS relating to this search action is required in third and higher opinions or the related IPRPII.

Amended Reasons

Amended Reason Date Amended

Edited for better readability and accessibility. Rearranged for more logical flow of information. Edited for consistency with Style Manual. Added subheadings and On this Page menu. Added links. 

Published for testing
Back to top