Appeal No. 1999-0157
Application No. 08/113,310
that the context of the constant temperature fermenting
wherein the length of the fermenting time is determined in
response to the selected ripeness setting, is a concept
neither suggested nor taught by the proposed combination.
We note that Appellant's independent claim 2 recites
"wherein the ripeness of the food material is controlled by
varying only fermentation time at predetermined temperatures."
We also note that Appellant's independent claims 11 and 12
recite "the ripeness of the food material being controlled by
varying only fermentation time at constant temperatures."
We find that neither Moo-Young nor Christ teaches the
above limitations. In column 6, lines 18 through 41, Moo-
Young teaches that the fermentation process is controlled by
varying the conditions of oxygen, agitation, temperature, pH
and time. Furthermore, we note that Christ is not concerned
with the fermentation process but is directed to the
ensilaging process. Thus, Christ does not teach selecting a
ripeness setting, maintaining a constant fermenting
temperature, determining whether the predetermined time
corresponds to the selected ripeness setting, wherein the
ripeness of the food material is controlled by varying only
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007