Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/083,068

Ballistic-Resistant Garment

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Mar 18, 2025
Examiner
LOPEZ, ERICK I
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Angel Armor, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
148 granted / 277 resolved
-16.6% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
300
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 277 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Response to Amendment The amendments filed with the written response received on 09/26/2025 have been considered and an action on the merits follows. As directed by the amendment, claims 233-252 have been amended. Accordingly, claims 223-252 are pending in this application. Claim Objections Claims 234-241 and 243-250 are objected to because of the following informalities: The preamble of claims 234-241 and 243-250 recite “The method.” It is suggested the preambles of each claim are rephrased to recite “The method of making the ballistic garment” for consistency with claims from which these claims depend from. Appropriate correction is required. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 233-252 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,253,338. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are all directed to at least a ballistic-resistant garment comprising: a front panel, a back panel, a front panel member having a length, a front panel first fastener, a back panel member having a length, a back panel first fastener, and wherein said front panel first fastener is configured to couple to said back panel first fastener to tensionably fasten said ballistic-resistant garment about a torse of a wearer, and the method steps of making, providing, and coupling are well known and routine to those skilled in the art. Therefore, the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent. Even more specifically, the following claims of the present invention may be derived from the corresponding claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,253,338 (as seen in the chart below). Application 19/083,068 (claims) U.S. Patent No. 12,253,338 (claims) 233 1 234 2 235 3 236 4 237 5 238 6 239 7 240 8 241 9 242 10 243 11 244 12 245 13 246 14 247 15 248 16 249 17 250 18 251 19 252 20 Allowable Subject Matter Claims 233-252 are allowable over the prior art of record, subject to the rejections and objections above, as none of them, alone or in combination, disclose a method of making a ballistic-resistant garment comprising providing a front panel having a front panel pocket, a back panel having a back panel pocket, a front elongate member coupled to the front panel having an elastic length between opposing ends, a back panel elongate member coupled to the back panel having an elastic length between opposing first and second ends, and wherein the front and back members comprise fasteners at each of their ends, with fasteners on the back panel elongate member ends configured to mateably engage with the fasteners on the front elongate member ends. US 2017/0205205 A1 to Wellman teaches a ballistic-resistant garment having a front panel (5) having a front panel pocket (6), a back panel (8) having a back panel pocket (9), a front panel elongate member coupled to the front panel having opposing ends (sides of 5) having fasteners (58), and a back panel elongate member (36) having fasteners (12) received by front panel fasteners (58). However, Wellman does not disclose or suggested the front panel elongate member is elastic, the back panel elongate member is elastic, nor the specific arrangement and orientations of the fasteners coupled to the specific ends. Rather, Wellman teaches the elongate connector (58) is configured for slidable engagement with a slit (59) and, instead, uses a headed pin (49) having a head (50) for engagement with opening (12). Modifying the locations and positionings of the pin and head of the elongate connector of Wellman to claimed locations and panel ends would frustrate engagement and compatibility with connection to Wellman’s back fasteners (12). Modification of the cited prior art would be a hindsight reconstruction based on Applicant’s disclosure. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK I LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3262. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00am - 5:30pm EST. 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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at (571) 272-4888. 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. /ERICK I LOPEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 18, 2025
Application Filed
Nov 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599190
Hard Hat Fan Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582189
Helmet Goggle Designed for On-Road and Off-Road Use
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582182
GARMENT WAIST POCKET WITH POCKET RETAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582190
PIVOT MECHANISM FOR A SHIELD FOR A HELMET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12564238
HELMET MOUNTED VISOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
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
53%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+30.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 277 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month