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 • 5 patents granted in the last 365 days
Franklin Electric Co. Inc. has 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, indicating that each pending matter is being handled by a different examiner in a different technical group. This spread suggests that the company's innovations in the medical device field are diverse enough to fall under multiple examination categories. Managing prosecution across 2 different art units requires the company to adapt to varying technical standards and examiner expectations.
BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S is the busiest examiner for the portfolio. This examiner is responsible for 1 pending office action, which accounts for 1 of the company's 2 total pending actions. The other pending workload is managed by the second distinct examiner in a separate art unit. This balanced distribution of the 2 pending actions means that the company's prosecution risks are not concentrated under a single individual or technical group. Each action represents an independent opportunity for the company to expand its intellectual property holdings in the medical engineering space.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S | 1 | 62.4% | +28.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19210070 | MODULAR PUMP/MOTOR ASSEMBLY | BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19210070 | MODULAR PUMP/MOTOR ASSEMBLY | BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3746 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19210070 | MODULAR PUMP/MOTOR ASSEMBLY | BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S | 3746 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | May 16, 2025 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial