Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Ciliatech has 1 pending office action in Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering. It involves 1 distinct examiner and a single distinct art unit, reflecting a very focused prosecution environment. This concentration suggests that the pending matter is being reviewed by a specialized team dedicated to a specific area of medical technology.
LEVY, BRANDON WILLIAM is the busiest examiner, with 1 pending office action. This examiner is the sole point of contact for the company's current pending prosecution, making the outcome of this single action critical for the portfolio. For the practitioner, this means that all efforts must be directed toward satisfying the requirements of this specific individual. The presence of only a single pending office action indicates a highly targeted and limited engagement with the patent office at this time.
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) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| LEVY, BRANDON WILLIAM | 1 | 62.7% | +46.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18243938 | Method for positioning an interpositional ophthalmological implant using ab-interno approach | LEVY, BRANDON WILLIAM | 12d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18243938 | Method for positioning an interpositional ophthalmological implant using ab-interno approach | LEVY, BRANDON WILLIAM | 12d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3781 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18243938 | Method for positioning an interpositional ophthalmological implant using ab-interno approach | LEVY, BRANDON WILLIAM | 3781 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 12d | Pending | Sep 08, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial