Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 19/105,939

A PORTABLE ENCLOSURE FOR A NEGATIVE PRESSURE WOUND THERAPY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 24, 2025
Priority
Sep 20, 2022 — EU 22196506.4 +1 more
Examiner
ANDERSON, CATHARINE L
Art Unit
3781
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mölnlycke Health Care AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allowance Rate
721 granted / 1105 resolved
-4.8% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
1160
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1105 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 . 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 1-10 and 16-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 8, 10, and 12-14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,016,995. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims disclose all limitations of the present claims with the exception of a hinge arranged to join the first and second housing sections. Hinges are well-known in the art to join portions of a housing, and it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the enclosure of the patented claims with a hinge to join the first and second housing sections. Present Claims Patented Claims 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 8 7 10 8 12 9 14 16 13 17 1 Allowable Subject Matter Claim 20 is allowed. Claims 11-15 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not disclose the claimed invention, a portable enclosure for a negative pressure wound therapy, comprising first and second housing sections, an outer shell material and an inner insulation material wherein the second housing section is provided with a sound duct extending through the outer shell material and inner insulation material to allow a sound emitted by a sound generating device to propagate to an exterior of the enclosure, or a method of reducing noise using said enclosure. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNNE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6. 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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at 571-272-7159. 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. /CATHARINE L ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 24, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12766048
DISPOSABLE HYGIENE ARTICLE WITH IMPROVED FIT
3y 4m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12728045
ABSORBENT ARTICLE
6y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12728046
SANITARY ARTICLE WITH SHAPING ELEMENT
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12721759
MOISTURE RETAINING ARTICLE
4y 3m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12721762
DIAPER ARTICLE WITH MULTIPLE ABSORBENT BODIES
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+20.9%)
3y 9m (~2y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1105 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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