Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
3 pending office actions • 2 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Cotonova Co. Ltd. currently has 3 pending office actions in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. These 3 actions are assigned to 3 distinct examiners, meaning that every active case is being reviewed by a different individual. This 1 to 1 ratio of actions to examiners requires a unique approach for each of the 3 pending matters. DURAN, ARTHUR D is the busiest examiner for the company, currently managing 1 pending action.
The 3 pending office actions are spread across 2 distinct art units, indicating that the company's technology falls under the jurisdiction of 2 different specialized groups at the USPTO. With 3 distinct examiners and 2 art units, the company faces a variety of perspectives despite the small number of active cases. Because DURAN, ARTHUR D and the other examiners each handle only 1 pending action, the company's success is distributed across 3 independent negotiations. Practitioners should focus on the specific standards of the 2 art units while addressing the individual feedback from each of the 3 examiners to advance these matters.
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 | 3 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| DURAN, ARTHUR D | 1 | 15.8% | +23.6% |
| TRUONG, BENJAMIN LY | 1 | 0.0% | +0.0% |
| VAN BRAMER, JOHN W | 1 | 33.2% | +33.4% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18788578 | EVALUATION SYSTEM AND METHOD | VAN BRAMER, JOHN W | 34d |
| 19279178 | MATCHING SYSTEM, COMPUTING DEVICE, AND METHOD | DURAN, ARTHUR D | — |
| 18793000 | MATCHING SYSTEM, RECRUITER APPARATUS, AND METHOD | TRUONG, BENJAMIN LY | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18788578 | EVALUATION SYSTEM AND METHOD | VAN BRAMER, JOHN W | 34d |
| 19279178 | MATCHING SYSTEM, COMPUTING DEVICE, AND METHOD | DURAN, ARTHUR D | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3622 | 2 |
| 3626 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19279178 | MATCHING SYSTEM, COMPUTING DEVICE, AND METHOD | DURAN, ARTHUR D | 3622 | §101§102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jul 24, 2025 |
| 18793000 | MATCHING SYSTEM, RECRUITER APPARATUS, AND METHOD | TRUONG, BENJAMIN LY | 3626 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Aug 02, 2024 |
| 18788578 | EVALUATION SYSTEM AND METHOD | VAN BRAMER, JOHN W | 3622 | §101§103§112 | Non-Final OA | 34d | Pending | Jul 30, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial