In re Parsons

115 F.2d 925, 28 C.C.P.A. 787, 47 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 447, 1940 CCPA LEXIS 220
CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals
DecidedDecember 9, 1940
DocketNo. 4392
StatusPublished

This text of 115 F.2d 925 (In re Parsons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Customs and Patent Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Parsons, 115 F.2d 925, 28 C.C.P.A. 787, 47 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 447, 1940 CCPA LEXIS 220 (ccpa 1940).

Opinion

LenROOt, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, affirming a decision of the examiner, rejecting claims 1, 3, 30, 31, 32, and 40 of appellant’s application for a patent. Four claims were allowed by the examiner.

All of the appealed claims were rejected by the examiner as lacking-patentability over the cited prior art. Claims 1, 30, 31, 32, and 40 were also rejected by him as being indefinite in merely stating a result without giving the steps necessary to produce that result.

Both grounds of rejection were affirmed by the Board of Appeals.

Claims 1, 3, 32, and 40 are illustrative of the appealed claims and read as follows:

1. The method of curing curd which comprises holding curd to which no salt has been added at a suitable temperature for a sufficient length of time to develop a creamy texture.
3. The method of preparing pasteurized cheese which comprises mixing aged cheese with unsalted curd and thereafter pasteurizing the mixture.
32. A new product comprising matted or Cheddared curd of relatively high acidity having a creamy texture.
40. The method of treating curd which comprises holding Cheddared or matted curd to which no salt has been added until a creamy, short texture is developed in the curd.

The references are:

Cooley, 241,788, May 24, 1881.
Buskist et al., 821,334, May 22, 1906.
Kaufmann et al., 1,694,921, December 11, 1928.
Bulletin 608, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1918, pages 12 and 13.
Cheese Making, Decker-Sammis, 1924, page 218.

Appellant’s alleged invention is concisely described by the Board of Appeals in its decision as follows:

The disclosure is said to relate to a new process for the preparation of cheese and the product which results from the process. The process relates to the preparation or curing of curd for use in the manufacture of pasteurized cheese. The specification states that applicant has discovered that the matted [789]*789or Oheddared curcl without salt, if held at a suitable temperature for a sufficient length of time, develops a peculiar creamy condition, that this curd may be blended with aged cheese, water, salt, emulsifying salt and a neutralizing salt in such proportion that a pasteurized cheese will be produced having a desirable, uniform texture, flavor and body. It is stated that in the present process the matting or Glieddaring, instead of going on for a period of forty minutes to an hour, as in the manufacture or ordimary Cheddar cheese, goes on for days, that a suitable temperature is from 50-70° F. and the time "may be from three to ten days. As a resuj-t of this continued matting, a very high degree of acidity is said to be produced. Accompanying the development of this high degree of acidity, a new and different texture is produced in the resulting curd which is said to be very creamy and short and can be blended with aged cheese and manufactured .into pasteurized cheese having a very desirable texture. It is stated that the excess acidity can be successfully neutralized by treating the cheese blend containing the special cured •curd with a neutralizing salt, the preferred one being trisodium phosphate.

The patent to Cooley relates to the preparation oí curd from buttermilk. The buttermilk is heated to settle the curd; the whey is then withdrawn from the curd. Warm water is added to the curd and the curd is stirred thoroughly to wash out the lactic acid; sodium bicarbonate is sometimes added to assist in removing the acid. The curd is then drained and slightly pressed to’ remove any water that may remain. There is then added to the curd oleaginous material, such as cream or lard, and the resulting product is intimately mixed with milk to make cheese.

The patent to Buskist et al. relates to a process for making cheese in which less acid is developed than is usual in preparing the curd. Instead of salting the curd after the whey is drawn off, the. curd is covered with cold water of a temperature of about 50° F. The patent states:

After the curd has been in the water a sufficient length of time to feel not harsh, but soft and silky when squeezed in the hand, the water is drawn from the curd-sinlc and the curd is stirred and permitted to drain until quite dry. It is then salted, put to press, and cured in- any of the usual ways.

The patent further states that the process produces “a soft, velvety, purified curd, the foundation of a fine rich cheese.” It is also stated that the curd is “mellowed and softened in cold water.”

The patent to Kaufmann et al. discloses a preparation of a cheese product comprising mixing curd, apparently unsalted, with ground cheese, and thereafter heating the same to a pasteurizing temperature.

Bulletin 608 of the United States Department of Agriculture describes the conventional process of making Cheddar cheese. The publication states that:

* * * When the curd has broken down until it has the smooth feeling of velvet, which requires from one to three hours, it is milled by means of a machine, which cuts it into pieces the size of a finger. It is then stirred on the bottom of the vat until whey ceases to run, which requires from one-half to one and one-half hours, when it is salted * * *. [Italics ours.]

[790]*790The publication “Cheese Making,” Decker-Sammis, states:

The development of acid in the curd as described improves the flavor and texture of the finished cheese * * *.

We will first consider the rejection of the claims upon the references of record.

The examiner rejected claims 1 and 40 upon the patent to Buskist et al. Claim 1 merely embraces the holding of unsalted curd at a suitable temperature for a sufficient length of time to develop a “creamy texture.” The examiner held that the term “creamy texture” was indefinite, stating:

* * * what does “creamy texture” mean? One expert will opine that a “creamy texture” had been attained while another expert will disagree. * * *

He further stated that the distinction, if any, between “creamy” and each of the terms used by Buskist et al., “mellow,” “soft,” “velvety,” and “silky” is “clearly per se insufficient a basis upon which to predicate patentability.”

While appellant’s counsel in his brief asserts that one skilled in the art will readily understand the term “creamy texture,” there is nothing in the record to- substantiate this statement, and, as above stated, the examiner was of the opinion that experts in the art would differ as to when a “creamy texture” had been attained.

Appellant might, under rule 76 of the Buies of Practice in the United States Patent Office, have filed an affidavit with respect to the understanding of the term “creamy texture” by those skilled in the cheese-making art, but he did not do so.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
115 F.2d 925, 28 C.C.P.A. 787, 47 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 447, 1940 CCPA LEXIS 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-parsons-ccpa-1940.