Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Arkansas Children's Hospital Research Institute has 1 pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This action is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, SIPPEL, RACHEL T, who is the busiest examiner. The prosecution is currently limited to 1 distinct art unit, indicating a focused technical area.
With only 1 pending office action, the institute's immediate patent strategy is concentrated on a single point of contact. SIPPEL, RACHEL T is the only examiner involved and is responsible for the 1 busiest examiner pending action, so their specific history and preferences are the most critical factors for the practitioner. The lack of diversity in 1 distinct art unit suggests the current legal work is technically homogeneous.
This streamlined prosecution profile simplifies the management of the portfolio but increases the impact of this single examiner's decisions. Since there is only 1 distinct examiner involved, there are no opportunities to leverage different examiner behaviors to inform strategy. The resolution of the 1 pending office action will determine the immediate success of the institute's efforts in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SIPPEL, RACHEL T | 1 | 52.4% | +58.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17923511 | ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE CUFF WITH INTEGRATED SENSORS | SIPPEL, RACHEL T | 31d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3785 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17923511 | ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE CUFF WITH INTEGRATED SENSORS | SIPPEL, RACHEL T | 3785 | §103 | Final Rejection | 31d overdue | Pending | Nov 04, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial