Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Brinter Inc. currently manages 1 pending office action within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This active matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, STEINKE, SEAN JAMES, who also serves as the busiest examiner for the portfolio with 1 pending case. The presence of 1 distinct art unit indicates the technical focus for the company's current patenting activities.
Practitioners should note that the entire pending workload is consolidated under 1 distinct examiner. This creates a relationship where the outcome of the 1 pending office action depends on the perspective of the assigned official. Because there are no other examiners or art units involved, the prosecution strategy does not need to account for varying examiner behaviors or different art unit norms.
The active pipeline for Brinter Inc. is currently focused on the matters assigned to STEINKE, SEAN JAMES. The administrative overhead for tracking these matters is defined by the involvement of the 1 distinct art unit. This individual handles the 1 pending case, making them the gatekeeper for the company's progress in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector.
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) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 1 | 12.5% | +42.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18915523 | ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR PRODUCING BIO-MIMETIC NANOCOMPOSITE SCAFFOLD | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18915523 | ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR PRODUCING BIO-MIMETIC NANOCOMPOSITE SCAFFOLD | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1619 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18915523 | ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR PRODUCING BIO-MIMETIC NANOCOMPOSITE SCAFFOLD | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 1619 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Oct 15, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free TrialBrinter Inc. has 1 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 1 art units and 1 examiners.
Sean James Steinke has the most, with 1 of Brinter Inc.'s pending office actions.
Mostly Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals (USPTO Tech Center 1600), based on where its pending office actions are examined.