Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/589,249

Adjustable Therapy Wrap

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 27, 2024
Examiner
STOKLOSA, JOSEPH A
Art Unit
3794
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
240 granted / 379 resolved
-6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
392
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 379 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelton (US 4,055,188) in view of Koffroth (US 2006/0100682) and Visco (WO 2014/176418). With regard to claim 1 and 7, Pelton discloses a therapeutic wrap comprising at least one piece having an outer surface and inner surface (e.g. Fig. 1 shows wrap 11, pocket 17 defines an inner and outer surface), and a first and second end (e.g. Fig. 1 shows a first end and second end, edges 23 and 25). Pelton fails to teach a fastening means disposed on the inner surface of the first end and the inner surface of the second end. Koffroth teaches that it is known to use Velcro at both ends of the belt extremities as a fastening means as set forth in paragraph 19, for providing the predictable results of having a known fastening means to hold the belt in place on a user. However, Koffroth fails to teach the Velcro fasteners are located on both the inner surface of the first and second ends. Visco teaches that it Is known to make an integral therapeutic wrap/brace as either a single piece or a plurality of pieces such as two separate pieces that connect to eachother, the plurality of pieces/two separate pieces being of mirror symmetry to wrap around a particular body portion as set forth in page 13, paragraph 74 for providing the predictable results of accommodating different body portions of the user. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system as taught by Pelton with a fastening means disposed on the inner surface of the first end and the inner surface of the second end, the fastening means being positioned at the belt extremities as taught by Koffroth, and the therapeutic wrap being made of separate pieces that would be joined together as taught by Visco, since such a modification would provide the predictable results providing a therapeutic belt wrap that can accommodate different body portions due to the separate portions. Such a combination would necessarily result in the Velcro portions being located on the same inner side such that it can connect to the second piece. Alternatively, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to position the fastening means on the inner surface of the first end and the inner surface of the second end since in a multi piece construction there would only be so many possible combinations of the Velcro fastening means i.e. one on the inside and one on the outside, both on the outside, both on the inside. Therefor it would have been obvious to select one of the known possible arrangements of locating the fastening means on the therapeutic belt/wrap. With regard to claim 2 and 11, Pelton discloses at least one packet of therapy gel being disposed on the inner surface of the adjustable therapy wrap (e.g. Col. 3, line 10-32). With regard to claim 3 and 8, Pelton in view of Koffroth and Visco disclose the invention as claimed above. Pelton fails to teach the fastening means is a hook and loop fastener. Koffroth teaches that it is known to use Velcro (generically known as a hook and loop closure/fastener) for connecting the therapeutic belt/wrap together. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Pelton with use a hook and loop fastener as taught by Koffroth since such a modification would provide a known alternative closure mechanism for adjusting and sizing the belt to the user to ensure proper fit and prevent movement/dislodgement. With regard to claims 4-6, Pelton in view of Koffroth and Visco teach use of a hook and loop fastener as applied to claim 3 above, but fail to teach fastening means of snaps, buttons, or a zipper. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Pelton in view of Koffroth and Visco with using any of snaps, buttons, or a zipper in place of the hook and loop fastener since all of these are very well known alternative closure/fastening means and the selection of any of these known alternatives would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. With regard to claim 9, Pelton in view of Koffroth and Visco as applied above with respect to claim 7 disclose the invention as claimed. With respect to the limitation of the righthand and lefthand pieces are fastened at their respective second ends, the combination above already contemplates use of two separate pieces that join together, page 13 paragraph 74, therefor the pieces (righthand and lefthand pieces) would be fastened at their respective second ends. With regard to claim 10, the combination of Pelton in view of Koffroth and Visco as applied above already discusses that it would be obvious to select any of the known combinations of placement of the hook and loop fastener (i.e. both on the inside surface, both on the outside surface, one on the outside and one on the inside). With regard to claim 12-13, 15-20, Pelton discloses the therapy wrap being configured to be placed around shoulders, hips, or back (e.g. Col. 2, line 45-47). With regard to claim 14, Pelton discloses at least one packet of therapy gel being disposed on the inner surface of the adjustable therapy wrap (e.g. Col. 3, line 10-32). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A STOKLOSA whose telephone number is (571)272-1213. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930AM-530PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Teixeira-Moffat can be reached at 571-272-4390. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575964
COLD AND HOT PACK FOR BREAST THERAPY FOR PREGNANT WOMAN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575965
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR APPLYING HYPOTHERMIC THERAPY TO A HUMAN AUDITORY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12465517
PATIENT WARMING SYSTEMS AND CORRESPONDING METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12453650
Facial Warming Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent 12433786
HICCUP REMEDY
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 07, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+18.9%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 379 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month