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
Ebnet Medical GmbH has 2 pending office actions in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These actions are assigned to 2 distinct examiners but are both located within 1 distinct art unit. This structure indicates that while the company is dealing with different individuals, the technical standards remain consistent within a single art unit.
ALLEN, ROBERT F is the busiest examiner, currently managing 1 busiest examiner pending action. This examiner is responsible for 1 of the 2 pending office actions. Practitioners should monitor the 2 distinct examiners to identify any differences in their interpretation of the standards within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering area.
The presence of 1 distinct art unit allows for a more streamlined technical approach to the 2 pending office actions. Even with 2 distinct examiners, the shared art unit environment provides a common procedural baseline. The company can focus its resources on the specific requirements of the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector as applied by these examiners.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALLEN, ROBERT F | 1 | 73.2% | +61.9% |
| OSINSKI, BRADLEY JAMES | 1 | 78.5% | +11.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17767212 | SECURING DEVICE AND ASSEMBLY COMPRISING A RETAINING ELEMENT AND A SECURING DEVICE | ALLEN, ROBERT F | 12d |
| 17040342 | INDWELLING VENOUS CANNULA | OSINSKI, BRADLEY JAMES | 20d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3783 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17767212 | SECURING DEVICE AND ASSEMBLY COMPRISING A RETAINING ELEMENT AND A SECURING DEVICE | ALLEN, ROBERT F | 3783 | §103 | Final Rejection | 12d | Pending | Apr 07, 2022 |
| 17040342 | INDWELLING VENOUS CANNULA | OSINSKI, BRADLEY JAMES | 3783 | §103 | Final Rejection | 20d | Pending | Sep 22, 2020 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial