Brief summary
- Korean patent examination has two types of office action: the notice of non-final rejection (최초거절이유통지) and the notice of final rejection (최후거절이유통지).
- A final notice is issued when the notice contains only grounds for rejection that arose from an amendment made in response to an earlier notice. Every other notice is a non-final notice.
- The two notices differ in the permitted scope of amendment. After a final notice, amendments to the claims are limited to the four cases in the Patent Act, Art. 47(3), and an amendment that does not meet the requirements is dismissed.
The provisions are those of the Patent Act (특허법) in force from 11 November 2025. The classification of notices follows the Patent Examination Guidelines (특허·실용신안 심사기준) in force from 13 March 2026. Last verified on 9 October 2026.
Last verified
The two notices at a glance
As of October 2026.
| Item | Notice of non-final rejection | Notice of final rejection |
|---|---|---|
| Legal basis | Patent Act, Art. 47(1), subparagraph 1 | Patent Act, Art. 47(1), subparagraph 2 |
| When it is issued | The first notice the applicant receives, and every notice that is not a final notice | When the notice contains only grounds for rejection that arose from an amendment made in response to a notice of grounds for rejection |
| Period for submission of a written argument | Set by the examiner, within 4 months | Set by the examiner, within 4 months |
| Limit on amendments to the specification and drawings | The matter described in the original specification or drawings (Art. 47(2)) | The scope of Art. 47(2) |
| Limit on amendments to the claims | The scope of Art. 47(2) | Within the scope of Art. 47(2), only the four cases in the subparagraphs of Art. 47(3) |
| Amendment that does not meet the requirements | Becomes a ground for rejection (Art. 62, subparagraph 5) | Dismissed by a decision (Art. 51(1)) |
| Several amendments in the same period | Only the last amendment remains (Art. 47(4)) | Only the last amendment remains (Art. 47(4)) |
The statutory term is “notice of grounds for rejection”, and the document is the Notice of Preliminary Rejection
The Korean counterpart of an “office action” is the notice of grounds for rejection (거절이유통지) under the Patent Act, Art. 63(1). When an examiner intends to issue a decision of rejection (decision to reject a patent application), the examiner must notify the applicant of the grounds for rejection and set a period in which the applicant can submit a written argument. [1]
The document that the applicant actually receives is called the Notice of Preliminary Rejection (의견제출통지서). The Examination Guidelines require this document to state the claims examined, the parts that have grounds for rejection with the relevant provisions, and the claims that are allowable. [4]
“Notice of non-final rejection” and “notice of final rejection” are not names found in the text of the Patent Act. They are the names that Article 22 of the Regulations for the Handling of Patent and Utility Model Examination Affairs (특허·실용신안 심사사무취급규정, “Handling Regulations”) and the Examination Guidelines give to the notices of Art. 47(1), subparagraphs 1 and 2, of the Patent Act. [3][4]
The Examination Guidelines divide the notices of grounds for rejection issued by an examiner into two types (Part 5, Chapter 3, 5.3). [4] The Examination Guidelines state that the permitted scope of amendment by the applicant is limited differently according to the type. [4]
A notice of non-final rejection is not only the first notice received
A notice of non-final rejection is the first notice the applicant receives and every notice of grounds for rejection that is not a final notice (Patent Act, Art. 47(1), subparagraph 1). [1] A second or third notice can also be a notice of non-final rejection.
The Examination Guidelines list the following cases as cases for a non-final notice (Part 5, Chapter 3, 5.3.1). [4]
| No. | Cases for a notice of non-final rejection |
|---|---|
| 1 | The notice of non-final rejection after examination begins, whether or not a voluntary amendment was filed |
| 2 | A ground for rejection exists in a part that was not amended |
| 3 | A ground for rejection in an amended part, where that ground already existed at the time of the earlier notice |
| 4 | A ground for rejection that arose from a cause other than an amendment |
| 5 | A ground for rejection notified in ex officio re-examination |
| 6 | A ground for rejection notified in an application remanded after the decision of rejection was revoked in an appeal |
When several grounds for rejection are to be notified, the notice has one type. The examiner issues a final notice only when all grounds found are grounds for a final notice. [4] If even one new ground did not arise from an amendment, the examiner notifies all grounds as a non-final notice (Handling Regulations, Art. 22(7)). [3]
When the type is unclear, the examiner also issues a non-final notice. The Examination Guidelines give the reason as securing the applicant’s opportunity to amend. [4]
A final notice is issued only when every ground arose from an amendment
A notice of final rejection is the notice of a ground for rejection that arose from an amendment made in response to a notice of grounds for rejection (Patent Act, Art. 47(1), subparagraph 2). [1] Article 22(6) of the Handling Regulations also requires a final notice in this case. [3]
The Examination Guidelines describe two kinds of ground. One is a ground that did not exist before the amendment and was newly created by the amendment. The other is a ground that needed to be examined only because of the amendment. [4]
The Examination Guidelines give the following examples (Part 5, Chapter 3, 5.3.2). [4]
| No. | Cases for a notice of final rejection |
|---|---|
| 1 | The amendment added new matter |
| 2 | The amendment created a new deficiency in the description |
| 3 | The amendment took the application outside the scope allowed for a divisional application, a separational application (splitting-off) or a converted application |
| 4 | A claim that was examined is amended, and as a result a ground such as lack of novelty or inventive step is newly notified |
| 5 | A claim that is newly added, or changed to a degree equivalent to a new claim, has a ground such as lack of novelty or inventive step |
| 6 | A claim that could not be examined because of a serious deficiency in the description or addition of new matter is amended, and a ground of lack of novelty or inventive step is then found |
One example from the Examination Guidelines is as follows. The applicant adds element D to a claim that received a ground of lack of inventive step, and this overcomes the earlier ground. If the examiner now needs to cite new prior art that includes D, that ground is notified as a final notice. [4]
Cases 4 and 5 each have a proviso. The proviso to case 4 concerns an amended claim whose invention was already stated in another claim from the beginning. If the examiner has never notified the ground in question against that invention, the ground is notified as a non-final notice. [4] The proviso to case 5 concerns a claim amended into the invention of a claim that did not receive a ground for rejection. In this case also, the ground is notified as a non-final notice. [4]
A final notice presupposes an amendment. The Examination Guidelines limit it to the case where a written amendment was filed after a notice of grounds for rejection and a new ground arose in the amended matter. [4]
After a final notice, amendments to the claims are limited to four cases
After a notice of final rejection, the claims can be amended only in the cases listed in the subparagraphs of the Patent Act, Art. 47(3). [1]
| Subparagraph | Permitted amendment to the claims |
|---|---|
| Subparagraph 1 | Narrowing the claims by limiting a claim, deleting a claim or adding an element to a claim |
| Subparagraph 2 | Correcting a clerical error |
| Subparagraph 3 | Clarifying an ambiguous description |
| Subparagraph 4 | Returning an amendment that went beyond the scope of Art. 47(2) to the claims before that amendment, or returning it and amending under subparagraphs 1 to 3 at the same time |
The limit of the matter described in the original specification or drawings applies to both notices (Patent Act, Art. 47(2)). [1] After a final notice, the requirements of Art. 47(3) are added on top of that limit. [4]
A patent application in a foreign language (외국어특허출원) has one more limit. An amendment to a patent application in a foreign language must also stay within the matter described in the final Korean translation or the original drawings (Patent Act, Art. 47(2), latter part). [1]
The Examination Guidelines treat an amendment that adds an invention to the claims by creating a new claim as an amendment that does not fall under subparagraph 1. An exception applies to a new claim that is unavoidable when the claims are rearranged and that is clearly explained in the written argument. [4]
The requirements of Art. 47(3) are assessed only for the amended claims. When an independent claim is amended, the dependent claims that refer to it are also treated as amended. [4]
An amendment that does not meet the requirements is dismissed, and examination continues on the specification before the amendment
If an amendment filed in response to a notice of final rejection violates the Patent Act, Art. 47(2) or (3), the examiner must dismiss the amendment by a decision (Patent Act, Art. 51(1)). [1] The same applies when the amendment gives rise to a new ground for rejection. [1]
The rule on notices of grounds for rejection does not apply when the examiner intends to dismiss an amendment. The proviso to Art. 63(1) of the Patent Act excludes the case where the examiner intends to make a decision to dismiss the amendment (decision to reject an amendment) under Art. 51(1) from the application of that paragraph. [1]
An amendment that deletes a claim is an exception. Even if a new ground for rejection arises from the deletion, Art. 51(1) of the Patent Act excludes that amendment from dismissal. [1] In this case, the Examination Guidelines require the examiner to accept the amendment, unless there is another reason for dismissal, and then issue a notice of final rejection (Part 5, Chapter 3, 11.2). [4]
A decision to dismiss the amendment is made in writing and states the reasons (Patent Act, Art. 51(2)). [1] A decision to dismiss the amendment cannot be appealed on its own. It can be contested in an appeal against the examiner’s decision to reject a patent application (trial on rulings rejecting patent applications) (Patent Act, Art. 51(3)). [1]
If the applicant requests re-examination, a decision to dismiss the amendment received before that request cannot be contested in the appeal. Art. 51(3) of the Patent Act removes decisions to dismiss the amendment made before a request for re-examination from the decisions that can be contested. [1]
When an amendment is dismissed, the examiner continues the examination on the specification before the amendment. If the grounds notified in the final notice have not been overcome, the examiner issues a decision of rejection. [4]
An amendment filed in response to a notice of non-final rejection is not subject to dismissal. If that amendment goes beyond the scope of Art. 47(2) of the Patent Act, it becomes a ground for rejection (Patent Act, Art. 62, subparagraph 5). [1] The examiner notifies that ground (Handling Regulations, Art. 24(1)). [3]
A final notice is not necessarily the last notice
A notice of grounds for rejection can be issued again after a final notice. If the amendment overcomes the notified grounds but the examiner finds another ground for rejection, the examiner issues a notice again. [4] The type of that notice is decided again by the same criteria. [4]
There are three possible outcomes after a notice.
| Result of examining again | Action by the examiner | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| No ground for rejection is found | Decision to grant | Patent Act, Art. 66 |
| The remaining ground was already notified | Decision of rejection, without a further notice | Patent Act, Art. 62; Examination Guidelines, Part 5, Chapter 3, 5.2 |
| The notified grounds are overcome but another ground is found | A notice of grounds for rejection is issued again | Patent Act, Art. 63(1); Examination Guidelines, Part 5, Chapter 3, 11.3 |
The Examination Guidelines set an exception to the second outcome. It applies to an application that has received two or more notices, where the grounds of the last notice are overcome and a ground of an earlier notice remains. In this case, the Examination Guidelines require the examiner to give another opportunity to submit a written argument, not to issue a decision of rejection immediately (Part 5, Chapter 3, 5.2.1.3). [4] If the ground of the earlier notice was overcome and then arose again from the last amendment, the examiner can issue a decision of rejection immediately. [4]
To cite new prior art, the examiner must issue a notice of grounds for rejection again. The Examination Guidelines prohibit a decision of rejection that adds a new prior art document to the grounds already notified. [4]
The period for submission of a written argument is the same for both notices
The range of the period for submission of a written argument is the same for both types of notice. Article 16(1), subparagraph 2, of the Enforcement Rules of the Patent Act (특허법 시행규칙) sets the period for submission of a written argument under Art. 63(1) of the Patent Act at up to 4 months. [2] Both the non-final notice and the final notice are notices of grounds for rejection under Art. 63(1) of the Patent Act. [1]
The range of up to 4 months took effect on 11 July 2025. Before that date, Art. 16(1) of the Enforcement Rules of the Patent Act set this range at up to 2 months. [2]
After a notice of grounds for rejection, the times at which the specification and drawings can be amended are limited. They are the period for submission of a written argument for that notice and the time of a request for re-examination (Patent Act, Art. 47(1)). [1] If several amendments are filed in the same period, all amendments before the last one are deemed withdrawn (Patent Act, Art. 47(4)). [1]
Re-examination after a decision of rejection, and ex officio re-examination after a decision to grant
An applicant who has received a decision of rejection can request re-examination. The period is 3 months from the date on which the certified copy of the decision of rejection is served, and the request is made together with an amendment to the specification or drawings (Patent Act, Art. 67-2(1)). [1] If the period for filing a petition for trial in an appeal against the decision to reject has been extended, the period runs until the end of the extended period. [1] Re-examination can also be requested after the certified copy of a decision to grant is served and before the registration of the grant of a patent (registration of establishment of a patent right). [1]
In some cases re-examination cannot be requested. These are: when a decision to grant or reject has already been made in re-examination, when an appeal against the decision to reject has been filed, and when the application is a separational application (proviso to the same paragraph). [1] The second case does not include the case where the decision of rejection was revoked in the appeal. [1] A request for re-examination cannot be withdrawn (Patent Act, Art. 67-2(4)). [1]
Art. 47(3) of the Patent Act also applies to amendments to the claims filed with a request for re-examination. [1] The Examination Guidelines state that the scope of amendment at a request for re-examination is the same as the scope of amendment in response to a notice of final rejection. [4]
The current Art. 67-2(1) of the Patent Act took effect on 20 April 2022. It applies to patent applications for which the certified copy of a decision of rejection or a decision to grant is served on or after that date (Addenda to Act No. 18505, Art. 7). [1] Before the amendment, the period was 30 days from the date on which the certified copy of the decision of rejection is served. The provision before the amendment had no request for re-examination after a decision to grant. [1]
If the examiner finds an obvious ground for rejection after a decision to grant, the examiner can revoke the decision to grant ex officio and examine the application again (Patent Act, Art. 66-3(1)). [1] Ex officio re-examination is not possible in the cases of the proviso to that paragraph, such as when the grant of the patent has been registered. [1]
A ground for rejection notified in this ex officio re-examination is notified as a notice of non-final rejection. [4] Art. 47(1), subparagraph 2, of the Patent Act excludes notices of grounds for rejection issued before the notice of revocation of the decision to grant from the notices referred to in that subparagraph. [1]
Art. 66-3 of the Patent Act applies to patent applications for which a decision to grant is made on or after 1 March 2017 (Addenda to Act No. 14035, Art. 6). [1]
Some notices are not notices of grounds for rejection
An order to amend for a formality defect, unpaid official fees or a similar reason is not a notice of grounds for rejection. The Minister of Intellectual Property sets a period and orders an amendment under Art. 46 of the Patent Act. [1] That amendment period is up to 1 month (Enforcement Rules, Art. 16(1), subparagraph 1). [2]
The Examination Guidelines distinguish the period for an amendment of formalities under Art. 46 of the Patent Act and the period for consultation under Art. 36(6) from the period for submission of a written argument. These two periods are not the period for submission of a written argument referred to in Art. 47(1), subparagraph 1, of the Patent Act. [4]
How Korea differs
The US rule provides that a rejection can be made final on the second or any later examination (37 CFR 1.113(a)). [5] Section 706.07(a) of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office provides that second or later actions on the merits are to be final. [6]
The exception in MPEP 706.07(a) is where the examiner introduces a new ground of rejection. That ground must not have been necessitated by the applicant’s amendment of the claims. It also must not be based on information in an information disclosure statement (IDS) filed with the fee during the period of 37 CFR 1.97(c). [6]
The Korean Examination Guidelines require a notice of final rejection only when all grounds found arose from an amendment. [4]
| Country | Types of notice | Amendment after the final notice | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Korea | Notice of non-final rejection and notice of final rejection. Final only when all grounds arose from an amendment | Amendments to the claims that fall under the subparagraphs of Art. 47(3) are possible. An amendment that does not meet the requirements is dismissed | Patent Act in force from 11 November 2025; Examination Guidelines in force from 13 March 2026 [1][4] |
| United States | A second or later action on the merits is final. Exception: a new ground of rejection that is not caused by an amendment or an IDS | Cancelling claims or complying with formal requirements is possible. An amendment on the merits may be admitted only on a showing of why it is necessary and why it was not presented earlier | 37 CFR 1.113, 1.116(b), MPEP 706.07(a) [5][6] |
In the United States, a reply to a final action is limited to an appeal or an amendment under 37 CFR 1.114 or 1.116. [5] 37 CFR 1.114 is the provision on the request for continued examination (RCE). [5] In Korea, a written argument and a written amendment can also be filed in response to a notice of final rejection. What is limited is the scope of amendments to the claims. [1]
What applicants should do
- In general, we suggest checking first whether a Notice of Preliminary Rejection is a non-final notice or a final notice. The permitted scope of amendment depends on the type of notice.
- If new claims or changes to the elements are needed, we suggest making them when responding to a notice of non-final rejection. After a final notice, amendments to the claims are limited to four cases such as narrowing.
- If a notice of final rejection appears to be improper, the applicant can argue this point in the written argument. However, we suggest deciding the scope of the amendment carefully with the agent.
- We suggest checking, before filing, that an amendment in response to a final notice does not create a new ground for rejection. If a new ground arises, the amendment can be dismissed.
- The response in an individual case should be confirmed with a Korean agent.
FAQ
Does Korea have a “final office action”?
Korea has a notice with a similar name, the notice of final rejection. It is issued when the notice contains only grounds for rejection that arose from an amendment made in response to a notice of grounds for rejection (Patent Act, Art. 47(1), subparagraph 2). [1]
Is the second notice always a notice of final rejection?
No. If even one new ground did not arise from an amendment, the notice is a notice of non-final rejection (Handling Regulations, Art. 22(7)). [3]
Is a notice of final rejection always followed by a decision of rejection?
No. If the grounds for rejection are overcome, a decision to grant is issued. If another ground is found, a notice of grounds for rejection is issued again. [4]
Is the response deadline shorter for a notice of final rejection?
The range of the period is the same. For both types of notice, the examiner sets the period for submission of a written argument within 4 months (Enforcement Rules, Art. 16(1), subparagraph 2). [2]
Can new claims be added after a notice of final rejection?
In principle, this is difficult. The Examination Guidelines treat an amendment that adds an invention by creating a new claim as an amendment that does not fall under Art. 47(3), subparagraph 1, of the Patent Act. [4]
How DEFINE IP Law Firm handles this
When a Notice of Preliminary Rejection is received, DEFINE IP Law Firm first checks whether it is a non-final notice or a final notice. We then decide the amendment with the applicant within the scope of amendment permitted for that notice. For questions about responding to a Korean notice of grounds for rejection, please write to contact@defineip.kr.
Sources
- Patent Act (특허법), Act No. 21134, in force from 11 November 2025. Articles 46, 47, 51, 62, 63, 66, 66-3 and 67-2; Addenda (Act No. 14035, 29 February 2016) Art. 6; Addenda (Act No. 18505, 19 October 2021) Art. 7. The re-examination period before the amendment is in Article 67-2 of Act No. 18409 (in force from 18 November 2021). https://www.law.go.kr/법령/특허법 (verified 9 October 2026)
- Enforcement Rules of the Patent Act (특허법 시행규칙), Prime Ministerial Decree No. 2115, in force from 14 May 2026. Article 16(1). The range before the amendment is in Article 16(1) of Ordinance of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy No. 579 (in force from 1 November 2024). https://www.law.go.kr/법령/특허법시행규칙 (verified 9 October 2026)
- Ministry of Intellectual Property (지식재산처), Regulations for the Handling of Patent and Utility Model Examination Affairs (특허·실용신안 심사사무취급규정), MOIP Directive No. 41, in force from 1 July 2026. Articles 22 and 24. https://www.law.go.kr/행정규칙/특허·실용신안심사사무취급규정 (verified 9 October 2026)
- Ministry of Intellectual Property (지식재산처), Patent Examination Guidelines (특허·실용신안 심사기준), MOIP Established Rule No. 7, in force from 13 March 2026. Part 4, Chapter 1, 3.2 and 4.2; Part 4, Chapter 2, 2.; Part 5, Chapter 3, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4.2, 11. and 12.2; Part 5, Chapter 4, 3.3; Part 7, Chapter 6, 4. https://www.law.go.kr/행정규칙/특허·실용신안심사기준 (verified 9 October 2026)
- US Code of Federal Regulations, 37 CFR 1.113, 1.114 and 1.116, eCFR version current as of 6 October 2026. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-37/section-1.113 (verified 9 October 2026)
- United States Patent and Trademark Office, Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 706.07(a) “Final Rejection, When Proper on Second Action” [R-01.2024]. https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s706.html (verified 9 October 2026)