Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Hanita Lenses Ltd. maintains 2 pending office actions focused in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct examiners, though they are contained within 1 distinct art unit. THOMAS, NATALIE NICOLE is identified as the busiest examiner, currently handling 1 pending action for the company. This arrangement indicates that while the technology is concentrated in one administrative area, multiple examiners are providing oversight for the 2 pending office actions.
The use of 1 distinct art unit indicates a specialized prosecution environment despite the involvement of 2 distinct examiners. Because the 2 pending office actions are split with 1 pending for the busiest examiner, no single individual dominates the current workload. This structure suggests that while the technology is concentrated, the examination is being conducted by multiple sets of eyes within the same administrative group. Practitioners should expect consistency in the technical standards applied by the 1 distinct art unit, even as they interact with 2 distinct examiners. The presence of 2 pending office actions suggests a steady but limited volume of active prosecution for the company's medical device 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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| THOMAS, NATALIE NICOLE | 1 | — | — |
| PATEL, AREN | 1 | 77.6% | +17.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18514313 | MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR LENS | PATEL, AREN | 67d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3774 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18398921 | MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR LENS | THOMAS, NATALIE NICOLE | 3774 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Dec 28, 2023 |
| 18514313 | MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR LENS | PATEL, AREN | 3774 | §103 | Final Rejection | 67d overdue | Pending | Nov 20, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial