Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Dyqure LLC currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These matters are distributed across 2 distinct examiners, which means each pending action is being handled by a different individual. The prosecution is currently situated within 1 distinct art unit, indicating a concentrated technical focus at the USPTO.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is STIGELL, THEODORE J, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. Since there are 2 distinct examiners for the 2 pending actions, the workload is split evenly between them. This arrangement ensures that no single examiner's perspective dominates the company's current pending matters.
Practitioners should note that while the examiners differ, the 1 distinct art unit provides a common administrative framework for both cases. This allows for potential consistency in the application of art unit-specific policies. The presence of 2 pending office actions across 2 distinct examiners suggests a balanced but small-scale prosecution effort in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector.
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%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| STIGELL, THEODORE J | 1 | 78.3% | +14.9% |
| PELLEGRINO, BRIAN E | 1 | 55.2% | +35.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18631196 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN AUTOMATED INFUSION PUMP FOR ADMINISTERING INTRAVENOUS MEDICATION INFUSIONS | STIGELL, THEODORE J | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18631196 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN AUTOMATED INFUSION PUMP FOR ADMINISTERING INTRAVENOUS MEDICATION INFUSIONS | STIGELL, THEODORE J | — |
| 18435747 | CONICAL STENT FOR INTRACRANIAL ANGIOPLASTY AND METHODS OF STENT PLACEMENT FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT OF ISCHEMIC STROKE | PELLEGRINO, BRIAN E | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3799 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18631196 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN AUTOMATED INFUSION PUMP FOR ADMINISTERING INTRAVENOUS MEDICATION INFUSIONS | STIGELL, THEODORE J | — | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Apr 10, 2024 |
| 18435747 | CONICAL STENT FOR INTRACRANIAL ANGIOPLASTY AND METHODS OF STENT PLACEMENT FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT OF ISCHEMIC STROKE | PELLEGRINO, BRIAN E | 3799 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 07, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial