Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
3 pending office actions • 3 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
4Basebio UK Ltd. currently has 2 pending office actions in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These matters are assigned to 2 distinct examiners. The portfolio is active across 2 distinct art units, which indicates that the 2 pending actions are being evaluated by different specialized examination groups. This use of 2 distinct art units for 2 pending actions suggests that the company's biotechnology applications are technically diverse.
DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE is the busiest examiner for the company, responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending action. Because the 2 pending actions are split between 2 distinct examiners, the workload is balanced across the portfolio. The distribution across 2 distinct art units ensures that each of the 2 pending matters receives a specialized review from the assigned examiners. This structure reflects a spread of activity across different technical units within the biotechnology sector.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.
Difficulty is derived from the rejection statutes on the most recent pending office action. §101-driven and multi-statute cases are graded Hard; §112-only and obviousness-type double-patenting cases are graded Easy; everything else is Medium. "Unknown" means we have not yet parsed a statute for that office action.
| Bucket | Cases |
|---|---|
| Double-patenting + other | 2 (67%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (33%) |
How the docket's pending cases split across USPTO tech-center bands.
Manual office-action response work runs about 10 hours per case. The time-saved bands below show what IP Author's prosecution pipeline typically delivers — a conservative 20% on the low end, 35% in the middle, 50% on the high end.
| Examiner | Apps on this docket | Allow rate | Interview lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE | 1 | 56.3% | +40.2% |
| SCHLIENTZ, LEAH H | 1 | 41.9% | +38.5% |
| SCHLOOP, ALLISON ELIZABETH | 1 | 63.0% | +56.5% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18863312 | Nanoparticles for Delivery of Nucleic Acid Cargos | SCHLIENTZ, LEAH H | 25d overdue |
Cases in front of an examiner whose interview lift is 10 percentage points or more — i.e. interviewed cases historically resolve more favorably than non-interviewed ones. The top 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18863312 | Nanoparticles for Delivery of Nucleic Acid Cargos | SCHLIENTZ, LEAH H | 25d overdue |
| 19054584 | Linear DNA with Enhanced Resistance Against Exonucleases | DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE | 3d overdue |
| 18261083 | Linear DNA With Enhanced Resistance Against Exonucleases and Methods for the Production Thereof | SCHLOOP, ALLISON ELIZABETH | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1636 | 1 |
| 1618 | 1 |
| 1693 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19054584 | Linear DNA with Enhanced Resistance Against Exonucleases | DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE | 1636 | §103DP | Final Rejection | 3d overdue | Pending | Feb 14, 2025 |
| 18863312 | Nanoparticles for Delivery of Nucleic Acid Cargos | SCHLIENTZ, LEAH H | 1618 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | 25d overdue | Pending | Nov 05, 2024 |
| 18261083 | Linear DNA With Enhanced Resistance Against Exonucleases and Methods for the Production Thereof | SCHLOOP, ALLISON ELIZABETH | 1693 | §103DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jul 11, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial