Talk:Sealed crustless sandwich

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sealed crustless sandwich article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Sealed crustless sandwich appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 March 2005. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that The J.M. Smucker Co. was granted a patent on a sealed crustless sandwich, a type of peanut butter and jelly sandwich and it is often used as an example of a frivolous patent?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2005/March.

Wikipedia

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Does this ruling [1] affect the original patent?--nixie 08:20, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not directly, but since they are currently litigating against someone it could be used to make a persuasive case. Anyway, it ought to be in this article! --Fastfission 15:15, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Lien Tran

How does the author of the article know that "the patent examiner, Lien Tran, consulted on a minimal amount of prior art: seven previous patents issued between 1963 and 1998, and a 1994 book called 50 Great Sandwiches".

I guess it should read the examiner "cited" a small amount of documents. The number of documents consulted by an examiner is not public. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.145.187.188 (talk) 21:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Dead patent?

You have to be a bit careful about saying that a patent is "dead". Technically, the patent will still be alive, it just won't have any claims, hence it won't cover anything. In this case it certainly appears as if Smuckers has thrown in the towel, but it still is theoretically possible for them to revitalize the reexamiantion proceedings with a petition to the patent office for unintentional or unavoidable delay. see [2] --Nowa 12:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A "continuing patent application" must have a live original or child application pending. A CPA may NOT by filed to extend a re-examination.

"37 CFR 1.53(d)(1) A continuation or divisional application (but not a continuation-in-part) of a prior nonprovisional application may be filed as a continued prosecution application under this paragraph . . ."

Once the last child in a chain issues, the game is over.

There are no pending children applications in this family. It has been more than two years since the original patent issued, therefore, a broadening re-issue cannot be made.

During re-examination, no new claim may be added that has a broader scope than the broadest live claim that is currently in the application. All of the live claims in the application as it stands now are subject to the "not fully compressed" limitation that the BPAI has determined is indefinite. This limitation cannot be removed, even if a petition were granted.

Further, while a petition to revive theoretically might be filed, I'd be thrilled to learn what excuse the PTO might accept after oral argument at the BPAI.

Thus, as a practical matter, it is accurate to say that the patent appears to be dead. Ultimately, once the reexamination certificate issues cancelling all claims, the patent will be dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.183.199.34 (talk) 02:13, February 8, 2007‎ (UTC)

Perhaps they don't need the Ketchum patent anymore. Another sealed crustless sandwich patent application was filed my Smuckers in 2001. A number of continuations have been filed and one of those has issued as U.S. patent 6,874,409. At least one child application is still alive. serial number 10/958733 Thusfar this series is only claiming methods and apparati for making the sandwiches. Nonetheless, they could introduce a child application that claims the sandwich itself in a "product by process" claim. Thus they may not be able to get a patent on the Ketchum SCS but the door is open for getting a patent on an improved SCS.--Nowa 02:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 12:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an ad, not an article.

And it's written terribly. 2601:140:8302:E260:1589:E77A:7D58:ABD1 (talk) 15:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is an uncrustable a Ravioli or a Dumpling?

There seems to be an edit war over this because of an unfunny popular tumblr post.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) ω 01:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should go by what the patent says, and just call it a sandwich. This is like the "is a hotdog a sandwich" debate. But between ravioli and dumpling, I'd go with dumpling. Ravioli is two layers of *pasta* dough, while a dumpling is any type of dough. Frood 04:17, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

i saw the meme thinggy about ravioli on ifunny Topkek 16:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Topkekin (talk • contribs)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change, "Ravioli," to, "Pasta," as Ravioli is a type of Pasta according to the website, "Wikipedia," and by the Transitive property, ravioli is a tpe of pasta, making tis a type of pasta Aaaarroonnttaamm (talk) 14:43, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done As the sealed crustless sandwich, the subject of this article, does not involve pasta, the entire reference to ravioli (which was unsourced) has been removed. General Ization ^Talk 15:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you're here from Buzzfeed/Tumblr/similar

like from here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/catesish/are-uncrustables-ravioli?utm_term=.rtK50DkLvG#.avqkAZma2B

please stop assaulting this page for the sake of a bad meme. It's not even funny.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) ω 01:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Second article I found!: https://www.bustle.com/p/uncrustables-were-listed-as-ravioli-on-wikipedia-now-the-internet-is-at-war-trying-to-classify-them-8524910 This time it even included my own revisions; journalism is truly so amazing a career.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) ω 01:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think tumblr posts are funny but this edit war was fucking painful to read -Gouleg (Talk • Contribs) 22:01, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Empanada and pasty as variation

Would an empanada or pasty really be a variation? Those are one piece of pastry folded over whereas an uncrustable is two pieces of bread crimped together. Not even comparable. --2601:642:C301:119A:9DFA:C51B:F2B1:AD32 (talk) 06:31, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 March 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the sandwich type to ravioli JakeTheDrake (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — IVORK _Discuss 23:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Uncrustables are a type of ravioli, not a sandwich, according to the Paris Institute of the culinary arts' handbook to catalog foods. 76.90.129.117 (talk) 03:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Waddie96 (talk) 09:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Uncrustables are raviolis. Briaisabel (talk) 03:42, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done See above. General Ization ^Talk 03:43, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a ravioli

It possesses all the qualities of a ravioli. It’s enclosed and contains food inside TruthfulCooper (talk) 05:45, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Among other problems with your theory, bread is not pasta. General Ization ^Talk 18:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the type to Ravioli *audible suffering* (talk) 23:42, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --DannyS712 (talk) 23:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Edit the classification of food type from "Sandwich" to "Ravioli". UnicornUrinal (talk) 20:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Nope. General Ization ^Talk 20:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Type Change

Can we please be serious now that all the trolling is done? It's clearly a type of sandwich, as ravioli requires it to be pasta with a filling. Pasta is not a type of bread. Food with a filling doesn't make something a ravioli. If that were the case, doughnuts, beef wellington, turkeys, cannoli, etc. would all be raviolis, which is clearly not true. GeekInParadise (talk) 01:24, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

???

Looks like one of the mods has taken the ravioli side, because that's what's currently up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.32.69.200 (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This foodstuff is not a sandwich nor a ravioli. It is an enclosed lasagna. 119.18.3.218 (talk) 08:18, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Mercer appleton (talk) 19:45, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it is a ravioli beacause it is sealed on all sides

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prior history of Uncrustables

This article needs to discuss the history prior to the purchase of Uncrustables by Smuckers. Maybe this Business Insider article is a good reference [3]. Invented 1995 by Geske and Kretchman. Purchased by Smuckers in 1998. Roket (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese sandwiches

The idea of a "sealed crustless sandwich" was not novel in the US or the world. Two products that continue production today are "Snack Sandwich" (Sunakku Sando) by Fuji Bread and Roba Bread in 1975, and "Lunch Pack" (Ranchi Pakku) by Yamazaki Bread in 1984. Link to Japanese-language Lunch Pack article. They are both sealed , crustless, and feature pressed edges. Roket (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]