Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Clearside Biomedical Inc. currently has 2 pending office actions in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These 2 actions are handled by 2 distinct examiners, resulting in a distributed workload. All prosecution is contained within 1 distinct art unit.
PECKHAM, RICHARD GRANT is the busiest examiner for the organization, holding 1 busiest examiner pending office action. This represents 1 of the 2 total pending office actions. The concentration in 1 distinct art unit within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals field suggests that the current filings are closely related in subject matter. Practitioners can expect a consistent technical baseline given the 1 distinct art unit involved in these 2 pending office actions. The use of 2 distinct examiners allows the company to receive feedback from two different perspectives within the same technical division.
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 (50%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PECKHAM, RICHARD GRANT | 1 | 68.1% | +35.1% |
| HUI, SAN MING R | 1 | 59.5% | +20.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18726889 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING MACULAR EDEMA ASSOCIATED WITH UVEITIS | PECKHAM, RICHARD GRANT | — |
| 17478112 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING NONINFECTIOUS UVEITIS | HUI, SAN MING R | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1627 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18726889 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING MACULAR EDEMA ASSOCIATED WITH UVEITIS | PECKHAM, RICHARD GRANT | — | §102§103§112DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jul 05, 2024 |
| 17478112 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING NONINFECTIOUS UVEITIS | HUI, SAN MING R | 1627 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 17, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial