I will rephrase my question to make sure I understand.
The idea is the following. Let's say, for instance, that police officers go to a home to seize a cellphone, for example, but are surprised to see another device of interest that they did not expect to see in that home. Clause 3 in the bill, as it now stands, would allow them to seize that device even though it was not originally targeted. As I understand it, the amendment would have the effect of restricting the seizure, so that police officers could seize only a device that was originally targeted. Did I understand correctly?