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 • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Chu De Nice has 1 pending office action in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This activity involves the distinct examiner and the distinct art unit. SUSAN EMILY FERNANDEZ is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, holding 1 busiest examiner pending action.
The pending office action is the primary focus of the company's current Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals prosecution. With the distinct examiner and the distinct art unit being the only ones on record, the administrative process is centralized. SUSAN EMILY FERNANDEZ manages the busiest examiner pending action, meaning the outcome of the current filing depends on her specific review. This streamlined approach allows for a targeted response to the pending matter. Consequently, the action represents the full current workload for the entity's patent counsel. The lack of broader distribution across art units suggests that the company is not currently diversifying its intellectual property assets in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals field.
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 |
|---|---|
| §101 + other | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FERNANDEZ, SUSAN EMILY | 1 | 52.5% | +60.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18690436 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE CONCENTRATION OF INORGANIC PYROPHOSPHATE | FERNANDEZ, SUSAN EMILY | 30d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18690436 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE CONCENTRATION OF INORGANIC PYROPHOSPHATE | FERNANDEZ, SUSAN EMILY | 30d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1651 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18690436 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE CONCENTRATION OF INORGANIC PYROPHOSPHATE | FERNANDEZ, SUSAN EMILY | 1651 | §101§112 | Non-Final OA | 30d | Pending | Mar 08, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial