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, 10Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007