Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
BIONTECH SE is currently navigating 2 pending office actions in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct art units, suggesting that the company's research and development efforts span different regulatory or technical categories within the biotech sector. The portfolio involves 2 distinct examiners, each handling a portion of the pending workload. This distribution requires the company to manage multiple administrative relationships simultaneously.
VIVLEMORE, TRACY ANN is identified as the busiest examiner for the portfolio, with 1 pending office action. Because the 2 pending office actions are split between 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, the company faces a decentralized prosecution environment. Practitioners must manage these matters independently, as the feedback from 1 art unit or examiner may not directly apply to the other pending action. This structure highlights the need for a versatile prosecution strategy that can address the specific requirements of different examiners and art units.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 |
|---|---|
| §101 + other | 1 (50%) |
| §103 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| VIVLEMORE, TRACY ANN | 1 | 73.0% | +6.6% |
| CUNNINGCHEN, KATHLEEN MARY | 1 | 61.1% | +62.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17906448 | ANTIGEN-SPECIFIC T CELL RECEPTORS AND T CELL EPITOPES | VIVLEMORE, TRACY ANN | 9d overdue |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17310463 | CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR-MODIFIED CELLS FOR THE TREATMENT OF CLDN6-EXPRESSING CANCERS | CUNNINGCHEN, KATHLEEN MARY | 7d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1638 | 1 |
| 1646 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17906448 | ANTIGEN-SPECIFIC T CELL RECEPTORS AND T CELL EPITOPES | VIVLEMORE, TRACY ANN | 1638 | §101§102§112 | Final Rejection | 9d overdue | Pending | Sep 15, 2022 |
| 17310463 | CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR-MODIFIED CELLS FOR THE TREATMENT OF CLDN6-EXPRESSING CANCERS | CUNNINGCHEN, KATHLEEN MARY | 1646 | §103Other | Final Rejection | 7d | Pending | Aug 04, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial