Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Al Chi Mi A S R L currently manages 2 pending office actions in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. Both of these matters are assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit. This concentration indicates that the company's current patent applications are being reviewed by the same technical specialist. Such a structure allows for a consistent prosecution approach across the entire active portfolio of 2 pending office actions.
WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, handling 2 pending office actions. This single examiner is responsible for the company's entire pending workload. Because both matters are in 1 distinct art unit, the company can expect the same examination criteria and procedural rules to be applied to both applications. This simplifies the management of the 2 pending office actions as there is only 1 point of contact at the USPTO.
For the practitioner, this data suggests that the results for one application are likely to be correlated with the results of the other. Any feedback received from WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON on one matter should be analyzed for its impact on the second pending office action. The focus on 1 distinct art unit within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals area suggests a specific technical niche. The company's patent strategy is currently dependent on the decisions of this 1 examiner.
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 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON | 2 | 0.0% | +0.0% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18506219 | PRESERVATION SOLUTION, PRESERVATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRESERVING BIOLOGICAL TISSUES IN VITRO, IN PARTICULAR CORNEAL TISSUES | WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON | — |
| 18506225 | PRESERVATION SOLUTION, PRESERVATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRESERVING BIOLOGICAL TISSUES IN VITRO, IN PARTICULAR CORNEAL TISSUES | WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1632 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18506219 | PRESERVATION SOLUTION, PRESERVATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRESERVING BIOLOGICAL TISSUES IN VITRO, IN PARTICULAR CORNEAL TISSUES | WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON | 1632 | DP | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Nov 10, 2023 |
| 18506225 | PRESERVATION SOLUTION, PRESERVATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRESERVING BIOLOGICAL TISSUES IN VITRO, IN PARTICULAR CORNEAL TISSUES | WRIGHT, ERIC BRANDON | 1632 | §103§112DP | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Nov 10, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free TrialAl Chi Mi A S R L has 2 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 1 art units and 1 examiners.
Eric Brandon Wright has the most, with 2 of Al Chi Mi A S R L's pending office actions.
Mostly Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals (USPTO Tech Center 1600), based on where its pending office actions are examined.
