The claim of letters patent No. 48,128, granted to John Searle,
July 11, 1865, for an "improved process of imparting age to wines,"
namely,
"The introducing the heat by steam, or otherwise, to the wine
itself, by means of metallic pipes or chambers passing through the
casks or vessel, substantially as set forth."
is not valid for a process, because no different effect on the
wine is produced from that resulting from the old method of
applying heat to the wine, and is not valid for the apparatus,
because that had before been used in the same way for heating a
liquid.
Bill in equity to restrain infringement of letters patent.
Decree for complainant. Respondent appealed. The case is stated in
the opinion of the Court.
MR. JUSTICE BLATCHFORD delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a suit in equity, brought in the Circuit Court of the
United States for the District of California by Sophia Searle,
Page 124 U. S. 61
as executrix of the last will and testament of John Searle,
deceased, against Benjamin Dreyfus, Emanuel Goldstein, Jacob
Frowenfeld, and John J. Weglein, co-partners under the firm name of
B. Dreyfus & Co., for the infringement of letters patent of the
United States, No. 48,728, granted to John Searle, July 11, 1865,
for 17 years from June 15, 1865, for an "improved process of
imparting age to wines." The bill was filed December 21, 1881.
The specification and claim of the patent are in these
words:
"Be it known that I, John Searle, of the City and County of San
Francisco, State of California, have invented a new and improved
process for imparting 'age to wines and liquors,' and I do hereby
declare that the within is a full and exact description of the
same."
"The nature of my invention consists in providing a process for
shortening the time that is now required for ripening wines and
liquors to about one-half the period, without deteriorating their
flavor by the use of steam."
"Madeira, sherry, port, teneriffe, and other wines have been
prepared for many years, for imparting age, through the medium of
'estufas' or large ovens, having flues by which they are heated.
These 'estufas' are filled with wines and spirits in casks or
pipes, and are kept at a proper heat until the contents of the
casks show the desired age through the staves. By this process, the
heat must necessarily be very great (say 140�), which
impairs the flavor of the wine by imparting to it the taste of the
cask, and oftentimes the casks have to be taken out and recoopered
before the process can be completed."
"By the use of my process, the following advantages are
derived:"
"1st. There is a great saving of time and fuel, the building and
air not being heated within as by the old process."
"2d. It can be effected in casks of the largest size, thereby
insuring uniformity of quality in the wine."
"3d. The process can be carried on in any storehouse or cellar.
"
Page 124 U. S. 62
"4th. There is no injury to the casks, whereas by the old system
they become damaged and require constant repairs."
"5th. The breakage and loss on the liquors is very much reduced,
which is sometimes excessive in the 'estufas,' by the falling to
pieces of the heated and dried-up casks."
"6th. No bad taste is imparted to the liquors during my process,
which is too often the case in the 'estufas,' where the wine
receives the heat through the sides of the cask."
"To enable others skilled in the art to make use of my
improvement, I will proceed to describe my process and its
operation. I use casks or tanks (as the case may be) for holding
the wine; if casks, they may be placed on end. Through each of
these casks or tanks, near the base, I pass an iron or metallic
pipe (copper is preferable), of about one inch, and open at its
end. These pipes connect with a main steam pipe, and can be closed
and the steam shut off, should the heat become too great for the
wine, by means of a stop cock attached to each of the pipes. The
degree of heat which I use in the operation varies from 100�
to 140�. The time required to perfect the operation of
ripening wine by this process is about six weeks, yet, of course,
it will be left to the knowledge and discretion of the keeper of
the cellar to determine when the ripening process is
completed."
"Having thus described my invention, what I claim and desire to
secure by letters patent is the introducing the heat by steam, or
otherwise, to the wine itself by means of metallic pipes or
chambers passing through the casks or vessel, substantially as set
forth."
The answer of the defendants denied that the invention was new
or useful, and alleged that it was in public use in San Francisco
for more than two years prior to the date of the application by
Searle for the patent by two persons, named Wieland and Voorman.
Issue being joined, proofs were taken on both sides, and on the
twenty-second of May, 1883, the circuit court entered an
interlocutory decree adjudging the patent to be valid that the
defendants had infringed upon it by treating and aging wine by
the
Page 124 U. S. 63
process described and claimed in it, and ordering a reference to
a master to take and report an account of profits from the
infringement. He reported the amount of profits to have been
$3,249.60. Both parties excepted to the report, but all the
exceptions were overruled, and a final decree was entered in
August, 1884, awarding a recovery to the plaintiff of $3,249.60,
with interest from the date of the entry of the interlocutory
decree, May 22, 1883, and costs. From this decree the defendants
have appealed to this Court.
It is stated in the specification of the patent that age had
been imparted to wines, for many years, by placing them in casks in
"estufas," or large ovens, and keeping up a proper heat therein on
the outside of the casks until the contents of the casks showed the
desired age. The application of artificial heat to impart age to
wines was therefore old. The heat was applied to the wine from the
outside. The new process claimed in the patent is to introduce the
heat by causing steam, or other heating medium, to pass through
metallic pipes or chambers placed on the inside of the cask, and
within the body of the wine in the cask. This is called in the
patent a new process, but, so far as the action or effect of heat
on the wine is concerned, in respect to ripening it or imparting to
it what is called "age," or any other quality imparted to it by
heat, the effect or result is the same as that produced by
imparting the heat to the wine from the heated air, in the
old-fashioned "estufa" or oven. It is shown by the evidence that
the application of the heat to the wine from the inside of the cask
has no different effect upon it from that of the heat as applied by
the old process, and that no chemical or other change is produced
in the wine different from that produced by the old process.
There was no novelty in the process as a patentable process.
Whatever novelty there could have been must have consisted wholly
in the apparatus used for introducing the heat to the inside of the
body of the wine. But it appears by the evidence that the
apparatus, as a means of imparting heat from it to the body of the
liquid inside of which it was placed, was not new. Wieland
testifies that for twenty-five years prior to
Page 124 U. S. 64
November, 1882, he had, in conducting his business as a brewer
in San Francisco, heated water by means of a copper coil filled
with exhaust steam, placed in the water, the water being in a
closed tub containing fifty or sixty barrels, the copper pipe
entering the tub on the side, near the bottom, and forming a coil
inside, and then passing out through the top. It also appears that
a like apparatus was used in the United States prior to the issuing
of the plaintiff's patent for the purpose of heating high wines by
means of steam in a copper coil, so as to evolve the alcoholic
vapors. There was no patentable invention in applying to the
heating of wine or any other liquor, from the inside of the cask,
the apparatus which had been previously used to heat another liquid
in the same manner.
The case falls directly within the decisions of this Court in
Pomace Holder Co. v. Ferguson, 119 U.
S. 335,
119 U. S. 338,
and the cases there collected, and in
Thatcher Heating Co. v.
Burtis, 121 U. S. 286.
There having been therefore nothing new as a process in the
operation or effect of the heat on the wine, and nothing patentable
in the application of the old apparatus to the heating of the
wine,
The decree of the circuit court must be reversed, and the
case be remanded to the Circuit Court for the Northern District of
California with a direction to dismiss the bill.