i) Requests belatedly substantiated 

In T 319/18 the board recalled that Art. 12(3) RPBA 2020, analogously to Art. 12(2) RPBA 2007 (which was applicable when the submission at issue was filed), required that the parties to appeal proceedings set out their complete case in their initial submissions (statement of grounds of appeal and reply thereto). The board held, with reference to T 933/09 and T 1533/13, that with respect to the filing of a new set of claims, it was necessary to explicitly state why the amendments overcame the objections on which the decision under appeal was based and/or which were raised by the opponent. The board continued that, unless the purpose of the amendments in respect of overcoming the prevailing objections was self-explanatory, if reasons explaining why the new claims overcome the outstanding objections were filed after the statement of grounds of appeal or the reply, these reasons constituted an amendment to the party's appeal case. In the case in hand, the amendments were not self-explanatory and the board stressed that, therefore, in line with established jurisprudence of the boards, the requests became effective only at the date on which they were substantiated (here in a letter in response to the preliminary opinion of the board). The request was not admitted (Art. 13(2) RPBA 2020).