Written Opinion Of The International Searching Authority {PCT-ISA-237}

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY From the INTERNATIONAL SEARCHING AUTHORITY To: PCT WRITTEN OPINION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SEARCHING AUTHORITY (PCT Rule 43bis.1) Date of mailing (day/month/year) Applicant's or agent's file reference FOR FURTHER ACTION See paragraph 2 below International filing date (day/month/year) Priority date (day/month/year) International application No. International Patent Classification (IPC) or both national classification and IPC Applicant 1. This opinion contains indications relating to the following items: Box No. I Box No. II Box No. III Box No. IV Box No. V Box No. VI Basis of the opinion Priority Non-establishment of opinion with regard to novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability Lack of unity of invention Reasoned statement under Rule 43bis.1(a)(i) with regard to novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability; citations and explanations supporting such statement Certain documents cited Box No. VII Certain defects in the international application Box No. VIII Certain observations on the international application 2. FURTHER ACTION If a demand for international preliminary examination is made, this opinion will be considered to be a written opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority ("IPEA") except that this does not apply where the applicant chooses an Authority other than this one to be the IPEA and the chosen IPEA has notified the International Bureau under Rule 66.1bis(b) that written opinions of this International Searching Authority will not be so considered. If this opinion is, as provided above, considered to be a written opinion of the IPEA, the applicant is invited to submit to the IPEA a written reply together, where appropriate, with amendments, before the expiration of 3 months from the date of mailing of Form PCT/ISA/220 or before the expiration of 22 months from the priority date, whichever expires later. For further options, see Form PCT/ISA/220. Name and mailing address of the ISA/ Date of completion of this opinion Authorized officer Facsimile No. Form PCT/ISA/237 (cover sheet) (January 2015) Telephone No. American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com WRITTEN OPINION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SEARCHING AUTHORITY Box No. I Basis of this opinion International application No. 1. With regard to the language, this opinion has been established on the basis of: the international application in the language in which it was filed. a translation of the international application into ___________________________ which is the language of a translation furnished for the purposes of international search (Rules 12.3(a) and 23.1(b)). 2. This opinion has been established taking into account the rectification of an obvious mistake authorized by or notified to this Authority under Rule 91 (Rule 43bis.1(a)). With regard to any nucleotide and/or amino acid sequence disclosed in the international application, this opinion has been established on the basis of a sequence listing: a. forming part of the international application as filed: in the form of an Annex C/ST.25 text file. on paper or in the form of an image file. b. c. furnished together with the international application under PCT Rule 13ter.1(a) for the purposes of international search only in the form of an Annex C/ST.25 text file. furnished subsequent to the international filing date for the purposes of international search only: in the form of an Annex C/ST.25 text file (Rule 13ter.1(a)). on paper or in the form of an image file (Rule 13ter.1(b) and Administrative Instructions, Section 713). 4. In addition, in the case that more than one version or copy of a sequence listing has been filed or furnished, the required statements that the information in the subsequent or additional copies is identical to that forming part of the application as filed or does not go beyond the application as filed, as appropriate, were furnished. 3. 5. Additional comments: Form PCT/ISA/237 (Box No. I) (January 2015) American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com WRITTEN OPINION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SEARCHING AUTHORITY Box No. II Priority International application No. 1. The validity of the priority claim has not been considered because the International Searching Authority does not have in its possession a copy of the earlier application whose priority has been claimed or, where required, a translation of that earlier application. This opinion has nevertheless been established on the assumption that the relevant date (Rules 43bis.1 and 64.1) is the claimed priority date. 2. This opinion has been established as if no priority had been claimed due to the fact that the priority claim has been found invalid (Rules 43bis.1 and 64.1). Thus for the purposes of this opinion, the international filing date indicated above is considered to be the relevant date. 3. Additional observations, if necessary: Form PCT/ISA/237 (Box No. II) (January 2015) American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com WRITTEN OPINION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SEARCHING AUTHORITY Box No. III International application No. Non-establishment of opinion with regard to novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability The questions whether the claimed invention appears to be novel, to involve an inventive step (to be non obvious), or to be industrially applicable have not been examined in respect of: the entire international application. claims Nos. _________________________________________________________________________________________ because: the said international application, or the said claims Nos. _________________________________ subject matter which does not require an international search (specify): relate to the following the description, claims or drawings (indicate particular elements below) or said claims Nos. ________________________ are so unclear that no meaningful opinion could be formed (specify): the claims, or said claims Nos. ________________________________________________ by the description that no meaningful opinion could be formed (specify): are so inadequately supported no international search report has been established for said claims Nos. _________________________________________ a meaningful opinion could not be formed without the sequence listing; the applicant did not, within the prescribed time limit: furnish a sequence listing in the form of an Annex C/ST.25 text file, and such listing was not available to the International Searching Authority in the form and manner acceptable to it; or the sequence l