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
Gary Fleischer has 1 pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This active prosecution is assigned to 1 distinct art unit, showing a specific technical focus for the current portfolio. The company interacts with 1 distinct examiner, which limits the variety of examiner perspectives currently affecting the patent applications. This suggests that the applicant's current innovation is concentrated within a specific mechanical or medical device niche.
MATTHEWS, TESSA M is identified as the busiest examiner, currently managing 1 pending office action. This single action represents the total volume of pending office actions for the applicant. Since there is only the single examiner involved, the prosecution process is concentrated, requiring the applicant to address the specific requirements of MATTHEWS, TESSA M. For the practitioner, this means the success of the current filing depends on the specific feedback from this individual.
The current level of activity within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector is targeted. With only the single art unit involved, the prosecution path is streamlined, as all active feedback from the patent office is concentrated in a single matter. This allows the applicant to focus on the specific technical and legal standards of the assigned examiner, simplifying the overall prosecution strategy for the current portfolio.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MATTHEWS, TESSA M | 1 | 83.0% | +24.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18207814 | LORDOTIC ROD-WASHER IMPLANT FOR LUMBO-SACRAL FUSION | MATTHEWS, TESSA M | 26d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18207814 | LORDOTIC ROD-WASHER IMPLANT FOR LUMBO-SACRAL FUSION | MATTHEWS, TESSA M | 26d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3773 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18207814 | LORDOTIC ROD-WASHER IMPLANT FOR LUMBO-SACRAL FUSION | MATTHEWS, TESSA M | 3773 | §102§112 | Non-Final OA | 26d | Pending | Jun 09, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial