In R 2/14 of 17 February 2015 date: 2016-04-22 the Enlarged Board of Appeal held that in the event of an objection to a member for suspected partiality pursuant to Art. 24(3) EPC, the statement of grounds of objection must contain the party's complete case in respect of the factual and/or legal circumstances that gave rise to the party's suspicion of partiality. The party may substantiate its initial submissions further during the proceedings. However, since the primary factual (and legal) framework has to be set in the party's initial statement, any subsequent submission must remain within that framework. Submitting new facts and/or legal aspects unrelated to or otherwise distinct from those previously submitted would constitute a new case outside the scope of the objection defined at the outset. In its catchword the Enlarged Board set out that the factual scope of an objection pursuant to Art. 24(3) EPC is defined in the statement of grounds of the objection initiating the interlocutory proceedings under Art. 24(4) EPC. Apart from a subsequent elaboration of said objection by supporting facts, evidence and arguments, the subject-matter of the proceedings, as a rule, cannot be extended or changed, whether by new facts or by a new objection. Accordingly, the Enlarged Board of Appeal did not admit a submission in which the petitioner referred to a new category of objections (personal or "subjective partiality" as opposed to structural or "objective partiality").