Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals • Chemistry & Materials
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
In The Bowl Animal Health Inc. currently has 2 pending office actions within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These 2 pending office actions are being reviewed by 2 distinct examiners, ensuring a separate evaluation for each case. Furthermore, the actions are located in 2 distinct art units, which means each of the 2 pending office actions is subject to the specific standards of a different unit.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN, who is currently handling 1 busiest examiner pending office action. Since there are 2 distinct examiners for the 2 pending office actions, the workload is evenly divided. Practitioners should be prepared to address the unique requirements of 2 distinct art units within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals field.
With 2 pending office actions and 2 distinct examiners, there is no overlap in the current prosecution personnel. Each of the 2 pending office actions, including the one assigned to MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN, represents a distinct path through the patent office. This structure requires managing 2 separate examiner relationships across 2 distinct art units.
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 |
|---|---|
| Double-patenting + other | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN | 1 | 32.1% | +64.8% |
| LAU, JONATHAN S | 1 | 63.7% | -17.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18543539 | ORAL FELINE FEED AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING FLEA INFESTATIONS IN A FELINE | MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN | 5d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1619 | 1 |
| 1793 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18543539 | ORAL FELINE FEED AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING FLEA INFESTATIONS IN A FELINE | MITCHELL, EDWIN COLEMAN | 1619 | §103DP | Final Rejection | 5d overdue | Pending | Dec 18, 2023 |
| 18543411 | ORAL FELINE FEED AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING FLEA INFESTATIONS IN A FELINE | LAU, JONATHAN S | 1793 | §103§112DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Dec 18, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial