a) General 

In accordance with the case law, the boards refuse to consider late-filed auxiliary requests on the ground that they are inadmissible where they are directed to subject-matter which prima facie is not allowable. Claims are clearly allowable if the board can quickly ascertain that they do not give rise to new objections and overcome all outstanding objections under the EPC and their patentability could be assessed without giving rise to any difficulty or delay (on this point, see T 153/85, OJ 1988, 1; T 270/90, OJ 1993, 725; T 955/91; T 92/93; T 401/95; T 862/00; T 1004/01; T 1202/02; T 922/03; T 87/05: T 1785/07; T 824/07; T 615/08; T 421/09; T 360/11). It must be immediately apparent to the board, with little investigative effort on its part, that the amendments made successfully address the issue raised, without giving rise to new ones (T 1634/09, T 1743/09). There must be no doubt that the late-filed requests meet the formal requirement and that they constitute a promising attempt to counter all outstanding objections (T 33/07, T 321/07, T 1650/08, T 1168/08, T 1634/09).

The board in T 2227/12 stated in its catchword: where only objections under Art. 123(2) and 84 EPC have been addressed in the contested decision and in the appeal proceedings, the board, in deciding whether to admit a request filed at the oral proceedings, need examine only whether it is prima facie allowable in view of those objections and need not examine its prima facie allowability under Art. 52(1), 54 and 56 EPC.