h) Inclusion of possibly unsearched features – procedural economy – request not admitted 

In ex parte case T 786/16 the request at issue was filed at a late stage of the oral proceedings before the board. Possibly unsearched features were added from the description, along with expressions which were not literally disclosed in the application as filed. The addition of the unsearched features further meant that the claim now included three alternatives, each requiring separate examination. The board noted that either an extensive examination of the new features with respect to compliance with Art. 83 EPC, Art. 84 EPC, Art. 123(2) EPC, Art. 54 EPC and Art. 56 EPC would have had to be undertaken at the oral proceedings before the board or the case would have had to be remitted to the examining division for further examination. In the board's view, neither of these steps would have been consistent with the need for procedural economy, even less so considering the primary purpose of appeal proceedings (Art. 12(2) RPBA 2020).