Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Adagene AG is currently prosecuting a patent portfolio within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. The portfolio includes 2 pending office actions, which are distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. KAUFMAN, CLAIRE M is identified as the busiest examiner, with 1 pending case assigned to her.
The data indicates a diversified approach to prosecution, as the 2 pending office actions are being handled in 2 distinct art units. This suggests that Adagene AG is pursuing intellectual property across different technical niches within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector. With 2 distinct examiners involved, the applicant must manage separate examination processes simultaneously. KAUFMAN, CLAIRE M, as the busiest examiner, handles 1 of the 2 pending cases. For the practitioner, this requires a strategy that addresses the unique requirements of each examiner and the specific standards of the different art units. The presence of 2 pending office actions across multiple units provides the company with independent paths toward potential patent allowance. This distribution helps to mitigate the risk of a single examiner's rejection impacting the entire portfolio, providing a more resilient prosecution profile in a complex technology field.
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 |
|---|---|
| §102 only | 1 (50%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KAUFMAN, CLAIRE M | 1 | 63.5% | +50.7% |
| BRISTOL, LYNN ANNE | 1 | 63.4% | +39.8% |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17759282 | HETERODIMERIC PROTEINS WITH FC MUTATIONS | BRISTOL, LYNN ANNE | 15d |
| 17924540 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING CANCER | KAUFMAN, CLAIRE M | 26d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1674 | 1 |
| 1643 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17924540 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING CANCER | KAUFMAN, CLAIRE M | 1674 | §102Other | Final Rejection | 26d | Pending | Nov 10, 2022 |
| 17759282 | HETERODIMERIC PROTEINS WITH FC MUTATIONS | BRISTOL, LYNN ANNE | 1643 | §103§112DP | Non-Final OA | 15d | Pending | Jul 21, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial