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
Endocon GmbH has 1 pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This application is assigned to a distinct examiner and is located within 1 distinct art unit. The narrow scope of current activity suggests a highly specific prosecution phase for the company. The presence of 1 distinct art unit confirms that the pending work is localized within a specific technical division of the patent office. Practitioners should note that this concentration allows for a focused prosecution strategy.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is BATES, DAVID W, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. Because there is only a pending office action and a distinct examiner, the entire prosecution effort is focused on this specific interaction. Practitioners can expect a direct line of communication for the pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering field. This centralized structure allows for a focused approach to resolving the matter currently on file. The lack of multiple pending actions suggests that resources are fully dedicated to this specific case.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BATES, DAVID W | 1 | 76.4% | +16.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18875787 | SURGICAL INSTRUMENT | BATES, DAVID W | 43d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18875787 | SURGICAL INSTRUMENT | BATES, DAVID W | 43d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3799 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18875787 | SURGICAL INSTRUMENT | BATES, DAVID W | 3799 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 43d | Pending | Dec 17, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial