Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
7 pending office actions • 4 art units • 6 examiners • 0 of 7 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 3 patents granted in the last 365 days
Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. maintains a company patent portfolio in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. The portfolio currently has 7 pending office actions. These actions are distributed among 6 distinct examiners, with SCHLIENTZ, NATHAN W acting as the busiest examiner by holding 2 pending actions. Prosecution activity is spread across 4 distinct art units. The presence of 7 pending office actions suggests a steady volume of ongoing prosecution within the biotechnology and pharmaceutical fields.
The distribution across 4 art units indicates a diverse technical range for the company's filings. With 6 distinct examiners involved, the company faces a variety of examiner perspectives. Practitioners should monitor the 2 pending actions with the busiest examiner while coordinating across the 4 distinct art units. This structure requires a strategy that accounts for varied examiner styles across the identified technical groups. The concentration of 2 pending actions with SCHLIENTZ, NATHAN W represents the highest point of individual examiner engagement within the portfolio.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 3 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.
Every pending office action with a known statutory deadline, placed on a days-until-due axis. Dots left of Today are overdue; the further right, the more runway. Cases that share a deadline window stack vertically. 3 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date.
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 (14%) |
| Double-patenting only | 1 (14%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 3 (43%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (29%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCHLIENTZ, NATHAN W | 2 | 41.3% | -18.9% |
| REYES, REGINALD R | 1 | 41.0% | +31.9% |
| KRINOS, EMILY LYNN | 1 | — | — |
| KIM, DANIELLE A | 1 | 37.1% | +56.3% |
| SEAMAN, D MARGARET M | 1 | 76.5% | +8.0% |
| HUI, SAN MING R | 1 | 59.5% | +20.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17691107 | DOSAGE FORMS HAVING EQUIVALENT BIOCOMPARABLE PROFILES | KIM, DANIELLE A | 5d overdue |
| 17576923 | PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF TREATMENT | SEAMAN, D MARGARET M | 19d |
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 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17086409 | PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF TREATMENT | HUI, SAN MING R | 86d overdue |
| 17691107 | DOSAGE FORMS HAVING EQUIVALENT BIOCOMPARABLE PROFILES | KIM, DANIELLE A | 5d overdue |
| 19191089 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MAKING PERSONALIZED INDIVIDUAL UNIT DOSES CONTAINING PHARMACEUTICAL ACTIVES | REYES, REGINALD R | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1616 | 2 |
| 1613 | 1 |
| 1625 | 1 |
| 1627 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19191089 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MAKING PERSONALIZED INDIVIDUAL UNIT DOSES CONTAINING PHARMACEUTICAL ACTIVES | REYES, REGINALD R | — | DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Apr 28, 2025 |
| 19074199 | TOPICAL DELIVERY OF EPINEPHRINE AND PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS | KRINOS, EMILY LYNN | — | §102§103§112DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Mar 07, 2025 |
| 18413556 | ENHANCED DELIVERY EPINEPHRINE AND PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS | SCHLIENTZ, NATHAN W | 1616 | §102DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jan 16, 2024 |
| 17691107 | DOSAGE FORMS HAVING EQUIVALENT BIOCOMPARABLE PROFILES | KIM, DANIELLE A | 1613 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | 5d overdue | Pending | Mar 09, 2022 |
| 17576923 | PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF TREATMENT | SEAMAN, D MARGARET M | 1625 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | 19d | Pending | Jan 15, 2022 |
| 17549219 | ENHANCED DELIVERY EPINEPHRINE AND PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS | SCHLIENTZ, NATHAN W | 1616 | §102§103DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Dec 13, 2021 |
| 17086409 | PRODRUG COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF TREATMENT | HUI, SAN MING R | 1627 | §103 | Final Rejection | 86d overdue | Pending | Nov 01, 2020 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial