Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days
Honey Bee Manufacturing Ltd. currently has 2 pending office actions within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. These cases are split between a pair of distinct examiners, meaning each active matter is being handled by a different individual. This distribution is mirrored in the administrative structure, as the cases are also located in 2 distinct art units. This suggests that the company's active filings involve different technical sub-specialties within the broader mechanical systems field.
FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD is the busiest examiner for the company, with 1 pending office action under their review. Since there are multiple distinct examiners in total, this individual shares the workload with another official, each handling a single case. The presence of multiple distinct art units implies that the company must tailor its prosecution strategy to different sets of examination guidelines. With various examiners and several pending office actions, the company's current USPTO activity is small but diversified across different technical and administrative boundaries. This requires a flexible approach to patent drafting and response.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD | 1 | 84.9% | +3.1% |
| COY, NICOLE A | 1 | 78.1% | -2.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18088465 | HEIGHT POSITIONING AND ADJUSTMENT SYSTEM FOR AN AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT | COY, NICOLE A | 196d overdue |
| 18732315 | MOUNTING APPARATUS FOR SWATHER HEADER | FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3671 | 1 |
| 3672 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18732315 | MOUNTING APPARATUS FOR SWATHER HEADER | FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD | 3671 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 03, 2024 |
| 18088465 | HEIGHT POSITIONING AND ADJUSTMENT SYSTEM FOR AN AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT | COY, NICOLE A | 3672 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 196d overdue | Pending | Dec 23, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial