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
Esco S A is managing 1 pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This activity involves 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit. NICOLE N RAMOS is the busiest examiner, currently handling the 1 pending office action. The prosecution is currently very focused, with all active USPTO interaction occurring through a single examiner. This centralized approach simplifies the management of the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering portfolio, as there are no competing office actions or varying art unit requirements to reconcile.
Because there is only 1 distinct art unit and 1 distinct examiner involved, the applicant can dedicate resources to understanding the specific examination patterns of NICOLE N RAMOS. Practitioners should focus on the technical nuances preferred by this examiner to move the 1 pending office action toward allowance. This streamlined profile allows for a highly targeted legal strategy, where every argument can be crafted to meet the specific expectations of the single examiner assigned to the case. The lack of multiple pending actions means that the company can focus its efforts on this individual application to secure its position in the Medical Devices sector.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| RAMOS, NICOLE N | 1 | 81.4% | +9.9% |
Cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate of 80%+ where the difficulty is Easy or Medium. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18257707 | ROTARY-HEAD MACHINING UNIT | RAMOS, NICOLE N | 66d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3722 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18257707 | ROTARY-HEAD MACHINING UNIT | RAMOS, NICOLE N | 3722 | §112 | Final Rejection | 66d overdue | Pending | Jun 15, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial