Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Branach Technology Pty Ltd. is currently navigating the patent prosecution process in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. The company has 2 pending office actions. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct examiners, yet they are both located within 1 distinct art unit, indicating a concentrated technical focus despite the involvement of multiple examiners.
The busiest examiner for this company is MEKHAEIL, SHIREF M, who is managing 1 pending office action. This means that the company's 2 pending office actions are split among the 2 distinct examiners. The involvement of only 1 distinct art unit suggests that the technology is tightly defined within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems field, even as different examiners review the applications.
With 2 distinct examiners, the company can observe different examination styles within the same administrative framework. Since the busiest examiner pending count is 1, no single examiner dominates the current workload. The prosecution strategy must account for the standards of 1 distinct art unit, which provides a consistent procedural environment for both pending actions. This distribution across multiple examiners within a single art unit allows for a nuanced but focused interaction with the patent office.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MEKHAEIL, SHIREF M | 1 | 62.6% | +64.1% |
| CHAVCHAVADZE, COLLEEN MARGARET | 1 | 57.3% | +40.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18001907 | COUPLING DEVICE FOR A LADDER | MEKHAEIL, SHIREF M | 27d |
| 17054416 | FALL CONTROL LADDER | CHAVCHAVADZE, COLLEEN MARGARET | — |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18001907 | COUPLING DEVICE FOR A LADDER | MEKHAEIL, SHIREF M | 27d |
| 17054416 | FALL CONTROL LADDER | CHAVCHAVADZE, COLLEEN MARGARET | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3634 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18001907 | COUPLING DEVICE FOR A LADDER | MEKHAEIL, SHIREF M | 3634 | §102§103§112 | Final Rejection | 27d | Pending | Dec 15, 2022 |
| 17054416 | FALL CONTROL LADDER | CHAVCHAVADZE, COLLEEN MARGARET | 3634 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 10, 2020 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial