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
Gn Corporation Co. Ltd. operates in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area with 2 pending office actions. These actions are split between 2 distinct examiners, which suggests a diversified prosecution effort. The data also shows 2 distinct art units, indicating that the company's filings are being evaluated by different specialized groups within the patent office. This variety in examination teams suggests that the company's research may span multiple pharmaceutical classifications.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is TINSLEY, BRENDAN THOMAS, who is handling 1 busiest examiner pending action. This implies that the 2 pending office actions are distributed, with each of the 2 distinct examiners managing a portion of the workload. For practitioners, this means navigating different sets of examiner expectations across two separate art units. This structure requires a strategy that addresses multiple examination environments simultaneously, as the 1 busiest examiner pending action represents only half of the current active matters.
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) | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| TINSLEY, BRENDAN THOMAS | 1 | 58.7% | +73.9% |
| ROGERS, ERIC JASON | 1 | 57.4% | +32.6% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17800307 | METHOD FOR CULTURING CELLS DERIVED FROM EPITHELIAL TISSUE, AND COMPOSITION CONTAINING CELLS CULTURED BY SAID CULTURE METHOD | ROGERS, ERIC JASON | 112d overdue |
| 17801102 | BIOMATERIAL PRESERVING COMPOSITION | TINSLEY, BRENDAN THOMAS | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17800307 | METHOD FOR CULTURING CELLS DERIVED FROM EPITHELIAL TISSUE, AND COMPOSITION CONTAINING CELLS CULTURED BY SAID CULTURE METHOD | ROGERS, ERIC JASON | 112d overdue |
| 17801102 | BIOMATERIAL PRESERVING COMPOSITION | TINSLEY, BRENDAN THOMAS | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1634 | 1 |
| 1638 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17801102 | BIOMATERIAL PRESERVING COMPOSITION | TINSLEY, BRENDAN THOMAS | 1634 | §102§103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Aug 19, 2022 |
| 17800307 | METHOD FOR CULTURING CELLS DERIVED FROM EPITHELIAL TISSUE, AND COMPOSITION CONTAINING CELLS CULTURED BY SAID CULTURE METHOD | ROGERS, ERIC JASON | 1638 | §102§112 | Final Rejection | 112d overdue | Pending | Aug 17, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial