Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Genective SA currently has 3 pending office actions within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These 3 actions are being handled by 2 distinct examiners, which suggests a very focused interaction with the patent office's personnel. The portfolio is also distributed across 2 distinct art units, indicating that even with a small number of pending matters, the company's applications touch upon different specialized areas within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is Sharma, Santosh, who is responsible for 2 of the pending office actions. Since Sharma, Santosh manages 2 out of the 3 total actions, this examiner's specific feedback and requirements will be the dominant factor in the company's current prosecution efforts. The 2 distinct art units involved mean that the 3 pending office actions are subject to the specific guidelines of two different examination groups, despite the small scale of the overall portfolio.
Practitioners managing these 3 pending office actions must prioritize the relationship with Sharma, Santosh, given their oversight of 2 cases. The presence of 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units for only 3 actions shows that the portfolio is not concentrated in a single procedural silo. This distribution requires a tailored approach for each of the 3 pending office actions to address the specific technical nuances of the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals art units involved.
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 (50%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CHATTERJEE, JAYANTA | 1 | 45.5% | +80.0% |
| SHARMA, SANTOSH | 1 | 73.5% | +28.9% |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19221360 | INSECTICIDAL PROTEINS COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USE | SHARMA, SANTOSH | 53d |
| 19418281 | INSECTICIDAL PROTEINS COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USE | CHATTERJEE, JAYANTA | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1662 | 1 |
| 1663 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19418281 | INSECTICIDAL PROTEINS COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USE | CHATTERJEE, JAYANTA | 1662 | §112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Dec 12, 2025 |
| 19221360 | INSECTICIDAL PROTEINS COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USE | SHARMA, SANTOSH | 1663 | §103§112DP | Non-Final OA | 53d | Pending | May 28, 2025 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial