Appeal No. 1997-3031
Application No. 08/411,509
later claimed subject matter involving the use of ultraviolet
light having a wavelength of 200 nanometers or less so as to
increase the ozone content of the oxidizing gas.
It is also significant that appellant has consistently
argued throughout the prosecution of this application that the
use of a UV light having a wavelength of 200 nanometers or
less produces a different reaction with ozone and oxygen than
does a process using a UV wavelength of about 250 nanometers.
Thus, although appellant originally describes the use of UV
wavelengths of around 150 to 300 nanometers and exemplifies
the use of UV light having a wavelength of 172 nanometers,
there is no indication or hint in the originally filed
application that a UV light having a wavelength of 200
nanometers of less produces a different reaction with ozone
and oxygen than does a process using a UV wavelength of about
250 nanometers as exemplified in the applied prior art
references and covered by the originally described broad range
of around 150 to 300 nanometers. Where the broad described
range pertains to a different invention than the narrow (and
subsumed) claimed range, the broader range does not describe
the narrower range. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 264-65,
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007