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
Cannamore Biotechs Ltd. is currently managing 1 pending office action within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, reflecting a highly focused prosecution profile. The company's current patent strategy appears to be concentrated on a single technical path. The 1 distinct art unit suggests that the innovation is being evaluated within a specific niche of the biotechnology sector.
KOSTURKO, GEORGE W is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, accounting for 1 busiest examiner pending action. Since this is the only examiner currently reviewing the company's work, KOSTURKO, GEORGE W has primary influence over the 1 pending office action. Practitioners should examine the past behavior of this 1 distinct examiner to anticipate potential challenges in the prosecution process. The outcome of the 1 pending office action will be determined by the examiner's specific standards.
The 1 distinct art unit indicates that the technical scope of the application is confined to one specific administrative division. Because there is only 1 busiest examiner pending action, the company's immediate patent goals depend on the resolution of this single case. The 1 pending office action is the only active matter currently requiring attention from the company, allowing for a concentrated and tailored response to the 1 distinct examiner's concerns.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KOSTURKO, GEORGE W | 1 | 54.7% | +49.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18270017 | A COMPOSITION FOR USE IN THE TREATMENT OF RECTAL AND/OR INTESTINAL INFLAMMATION | KOSTURKO, GEORGE W | 35d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1621 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18270017 | A COMPOSITION FOR USE IN THE TREATMENT OF RECTAL AND/OR INTESTINAL INFLAMMATION | KOSTURKO, GEORGE W | 1621 | §103 | Final Rejection | 35d | Pending | Jun 28, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial