What might an examiner do if amendments are submitted that do not improve patentability?

When amendments are submitted that do not enhance the patentability of a claim, the examiner may choose to object to those amendments. This is because the examination process requires that any changes made must contribute to the claims' compliance with patentability requirements, such as novelty, non-obviousness, and enablement.

If the amendments do not improve or clarify the claims or address the issues previously raised, the examiner has grounds to object, as it does not advance the examination process towards a potential allowance. This objection may also result in a refusal to enter those amendments, meaning they could be effectively considered as canceled from the application.

Approaches such as automatically accepting amendments or directly scheduling a meeting with the applicant would not be appropriate in this context, since the amendments need to demonstrate a clear benefit to patentability. Requesting more detailed explanations could be reasonable but does not directly address the underlying issue of the amendments lacking merit, which is why objecting would be the most fitting response in this scenario.