“Where the improvement of a claim compared to the background art involves anumerical range,the description shall usually give examples for the values near the both ends (preferably the both end values),and, where the range is broad,at least one example for an intermediate value.”(cf.Guideline Part Il,Chapter 2,section 2.2.6,paragraph 5th). To our understanding,the said requirements of the examples applies only to a claim “where the improvement …compared to the background art.…involves anumerical range…".The guideline does not instruct that any claim, as long as it involves a numerical range, must be supported by examples for the values near the both ends.Accordingly,such requirement in the examples shall not be mechanically applied to any claims without considering the nature of an invention.