Recommendation FP59: Recommendation 59

Each examiner’s separate opinion should cover: (i) the images of the mark and also the specific print used in the comparison; (ii) the examiner’s opinion about the quality of the mark; (iii) if the examiner considers the mark to be complex; (iv) whether third level detail is relied upon and the fact that such detail still requires to be supported by further research that has been validated; (v) identifying any differences between mark and print; (vi) a summary of the reasons why any differences between mark and print have been discounted and whether the examiner relies on objective studies and evidence to account for such differences or on common sense and experience; (vii) the characteristics relied on in making the identification, the number of such characteristics, and the classification of such characteristics, (e.g. ridge ending, bifurcation); (viii) a marked up image of the mark and print with a legend specifying the type of the ridge detail (including any third level detail) relied upon and the associated ridge counts; (ix) the opinion of the examiner; (x) any consultation with another examiner during the ACE-V process, including any facilitated discussion or panel review; and (xi) the fact that any novel method such as probabilistic analysis has been used or relied on.