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
Efaflex Inzeniring D O O Ljubljana maintains a focused patent prosecution presence with 1 pending office action currently active. This matter is situated within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area, suggesting a specific technical orientation for the company's intellectual property. The prosecution is centralized under 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, which minimizes the administrative complexity of the portfolio.
The busiest examiner, QUANDT, MICHAEL M, is responsible for 1 pending office action. Since this figure matches the total number of pending actions for the company, the applicant's immediate success depends on the interactions with this individual. The concentration of work in 1 distinct art unit implies that the company is not currently facing divergent examination standards across different USPTO divisions.
Practitioners should note that having 1 pending office action with 1 distinct examiner allows for a tailored advocacy strategy. There is no need to reconcile different examiner preferences or conflicting art unit precedents within this portfolio. The focus on QUANDT, MICHAEL M provides a clear path for prosecution, as all current efforts are directed toward resolving this outstanding matter in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering field.
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 |
|---|---|
| §112 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| QUANDT, MICHAEL M | 1 | 62.8% | +19.3% |
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 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17640866 | HYDRAULIC DOOR DRIVE FOR A LIFTING DOOR, LIFTING DOOR COMPRISING THE HYDRAULIC DOOR DRIVE, AND METHOD FOR OPERATING THE HYDRAULIC DOOR DRIVE | QUANDT, MICHAEL M | 27d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3745 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17640866 | HYDRAULIC DOOR DRIVE FOR A LIFTING DOOR, LIFTING DOOR COMPRISING THE HYDRAULIC DOOR DRIVE, AND METHOD FOR OPERATING THE HYDRAULIC DOOR DRIVE | QUANDT, MICHAEL M | 3745 | §112 | Non-Final OA | 27d | Pending | Mar 07, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial