Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Aquabeam LLC currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These matters are distributed among 2 distinct examiners, indicating that each application is being reviewed by a different individual. The prosecution is organized across 1 distinct art unit, suggesting that the company's filings in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector are grouped into a single technical category.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is ROANE, AARON F, who is responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending office action. This confirms that the workload is perfectly distributed, as each of the 2 distinct examiners is handling exactly one of the company's pending matters. No single examiner currently manages more than one of the 2 pending office actions in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector.
The use of 1 distinct art unit for 2 pending office actions indicates a high degree of technical focus within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering field. However, with 2 distinct examiners involved, the company must still account for different examination styles. The presence of 2 distinct examiners for 2 pending office actions requires the company to maintain simultaneous dialogues with the patent office while following the standards of 1 distinct art unit.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 1 (50%) |
| Double-patenting 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROANE, AARON F | 1 | 73.4% | +9.7% |
| FARAH, AHMED M | 1 | 79.0% | +18.8% |
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 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18958786 | TRANSURETHRAL TREATMENT DEVICE | FARAH, AHMED M | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3792 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19018639 | TREATMENT PROBE WITH MOTORS AND CONTROL CIRCUITRY | ROANE, AARON F | 3792 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jan 13, 2025 |
| 18958786 | TRANSURETHRAL TREATMENT DEVICE | FARAH, AHMED M | — | DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 25, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial