Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
I+Med S Coop currently manages 1 pending office action within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This pending matter is distributed across 1 distinct art unit, indicating a highly concentrated prosecution focus for the company's current portfolio. The workload involves 1 distinct examiner, which centralizes the interaction between the applicant and the patent office. This concentration suggests that the company's current patenting efforts are focused on a specific technical niche.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. Because this examiner handles the entirety of the company's current pending actions, the prosecution path is streamlined through a single individual. For a practitioner, this means that the outcome of the current portfolio depends on the specific examination style and requirements of MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN.
With only the single art unit involved, the company avoids the complexities of navigating different departmental standards at the patent office. The volume of active prosecution is relatively low, which may allow for more focused attention on the outstanding matter. The fact that only the single examiner is involved ensures that all feedback is consistent and originates from a single source within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals area.
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 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN | 1 | 32.1% | +64.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18266479 | Composition Comprising Sea Water and Cannabinoid Loaded Submicroparticles for Pharmaceutical, Nutraceutical and Cosmetic Applications | MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN | 60d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1619 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18266479 | Composition Comprising Sea Water and Cannabinoid Loaded Submicroparticles for Pharmaceutical, Nutraceutical and Cosmetic Applications | MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN | 1619 | §103 | Final Rejection | 60d overdue | 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