Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 5 patents granted in the last 365 days
Anthony, Inc. has 2 pending office actions in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. These matters are being handled by 2 distinct examiners. Both examiners are situated within 1 distinct art unit, showing a high degree of departmental concentration for these filings. This suggests that the company's current mechanical systems innovations are being reviewed by a single specialized group at the USPTO.
TUN, NAY L is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, currently managing 1 busiest examiner pending action. With 2 pending office actions and 2 distinct examiners, the workload is split evenly between the reviewers. The use of 1 distinct art unit for both actions suggests that the company's technology is being evaluated within a single specialized group. Practitioners should focus on the specific standards of this art unit, as it governs the review of all the company's currently pending matters.
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) | 1 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROERSMA, ANDREW MARK | 1 | 63.3% | +24.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19092385 | MULLION BRACKET | ROERSMA, ANDREW MARK | — |
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 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19092385 | MULLION BRACKET | ROERSMA, ANDREW MARK | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3637 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19092385 | MULLION BRACKET | ROERSMA, ANDREW MARK | 3637 | §103§112Other | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Mar 27, 2025 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial