1.1.

1.1. Does your National Patent Office’s administrative practice prescribe the following as regards the information to be provided as minimum reasoning when raising a non-unity objection?

Introduction to the objection:

• Where appropriate, statement of the legal basis for the objection, invoking a specific legal provision
• Identification of the different groups of inventions, including, where possible, the numbering of the groups and an indication of the claims belonging to each of these groups
• Grounds for the objection
• Identification of the common matter between the different groups of inventions or, if appropriate, a statement on the lack thereof
• If common matter has been identified, a comparison with the "prior art at hand" which:
• If applicable, explains why the features identified as part of the common matter do not constitute a contribution over the "prior art at hand"
• If prior art is relied upon, identifies that prior art
• Analysis of the remaining technical features which are not part of the identified common matter
• Explanation of why there is no unifying technical relationship among the groups of inventions, if applicable by identifying the differences between the remaining technical features considering the technical effects achieved or the technical problems solved by these remaining features.

Conclusion

The concluding statement explaining that lack of unity has been found may be supplemented, where appropriate, with information on any procedural consequences of this result at the procedural stage in question