Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
AlterG, Inc. currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These 2 matters are distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. This distribution indicates that the company's intellectual property is being reviewed by different specialized departments within the patent office. This spread requires a strategy that accounts for different departmental perspectives and prevents the consolidation of prosecution under a single authority.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is GANESAN, SUNDHARA M, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. Because the busiest examiner handles 1 of the pending actions, the workload is split between the 2 distinct examiners. Practitioners should note that the ratio between examiners and art units means each matter is likely being reviewed under different standards. This lack of consolidation prevents the company from relying on a single examiner's historical tendencies across the 2 pending office actions. Consequently, the prosecution team must prepare for distinct sets of prior art interpretations and procedural requirements for each application currently under review. The presence of 2 distinct art units suggests that the technical scope of the applications may vary significantly even within the same technology area.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 1 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 |
|---|---|
| §101 + other | 1 (50%) |
| §103 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| GANESAN, SUNDHARA M | 1 | 70.3% | +25.6% |
| YIP, JACK | 1 | 33.0% | +37.8% |
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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18450961 | PRESSURE CHAMBER AND LIFT FOR DIFFERENTIAL AIR PRESSURE SYSTEM WITH MEDICAL DATA COLLECTION CAPABILITIES | YIP, JACK | 110d overdue |
| 18476016 | METHOD OF GAIT EVALUATION AND TRAINING WITH DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE SYSTEM | GANESAN, SUNDHARA M | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3784 | 1 |
| 3715 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18476016 | METHOD OF GAIT EVALUATION AND TRAINING WITH DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE SYSTEM | GANESAN, SUNDHARA M | 3784 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Sep 27, 2023 |
| 18450961 | PRESSURE CHAMBER AND LIFT FOR DIFFERENTIAL AIR PRESSURE SYSTEM WITH MEDICAL DATA COLLECTION CAPABILITIES | YIP, JACK | 3715 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | 110d overdue | Pending | Aug 16, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial