Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Angiex, Inc. maintains a company patent portfolio within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. The portfolio currently shows 2 pending office actions, indicating multiple active points of negotiation with the patent office. These actions are being reviewed by 2 distinct examiners, which introduces different perspectives into the prosecution process for the company.
Despite having multiple examiners, the work is centralized within 1 distinct art unit. This suggests that while different individuals are reviewing the applications, the subject matter remains within a specific technical field of Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals. VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY is identified as the busiest examiner for this portfolio. This examiner is currently responsible for 1 pending office action.
Because the busiest examiner pending count is 1, the 2 pending office actions are split between the 2 distinct examiners. This distribution ensures that no single examiner is overwhelmed by the company's filings. It also means the company must manage two separate tracks of communication within the same 1 distinct art unit to advance its patenting goals.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (100%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY | 1 | 55.0% | +31.7% |
| SKOKO III, JOHN JOSEPH | 1 | 53.1% | +58.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18161405 | ANTI-TM4SF1 ANTIBODY-DRUG CONJUGATES COMPRISING CLEAVABLE LINKERS AND METHODS OF USING SAME | VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY | — |
| 18051573 | ANTI-TM4SF1 ANTIBODY DRUG CONJUGATES AND METHODS OF USING SAME | SKOKO III, JOHN JOSEPH | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18161405 | ANTI-TM4SF1 ANTIBODY-DRUG CONJUGATES COMPRISING CLEAVABLE LINKERS AND METHODS OF USING SAME | VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY | — |
| 18051573 | ANTI-TM4SF1 ANTIBODY DRUG CONJUGATES AND METHODS OF USING SAME | SKOKO III, JOHN JOSEPH | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1643 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18161405 | ANTI-TM4SF1 ANTIBODY-DRUG CONJUGATES COMPRISING CLEAVABLE LINKERS AND METHODS OF USING SAME | VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY | 1643 | §102§103Other | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jan 30, 2023 |
| 18051573 | ANTI-TM4SF1 ANTIBODY DRUG CONJUGATES AND METHODS OF USING SAME | SKOKO III, JOHN JOSEPH | 1643 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 01, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial