Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Computing & Software • Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
3 pending office actions • 3 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Innovaccer Inc. is managing 2 pending office actions in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. These actions are distributed between 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, with each examiner handling one action. This distribution indicates a lack of concentration in both examiner assignment and administrative units. The presence of 2 distinct art units suggests that the company's innovations are being evaluated by different specialized groups within the patent office.
The busiest examiner, MALHOTRA, SANJEEV, is responsible for 1 pending office action. With 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units for the 2 pending office actions, the company must prepare for two different examination styles and technical standards. Practitioners should analyze the specific tendencies of the 2 distinct examiners to navigate the pending workload effectively. Because there is no concentration across the 2 distinct art units, the prosecution strategy must be tailored to each individual case.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 |
|---|---|
| §101 only | 1 (33%) |
| §103 only | 2 (67%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MALHOTRA, SANJEEV | 1 | 65.7% | +30.1% |
| NEWTON, CHAD A | 1 | 37.6% | +23.2% |
| HAN, JOSEP | 1 | 45.8% | -0.7% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18420434 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED DATA INGESTION IN A REAL-TIME | MALHOTRA, SANJEEV | 55d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18540583 | IDENTIFYING MATERNITY SEVERITY INDEX FOR WOMEN | NEWTON, CHAD A | 27d |
| 18420434 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED DATA INGESTION IN A REAL-TIME | MALHOTRA, SANJEEV | 55d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3691 | 1 |
| 3681 | 1 |
| 2122 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18420434 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED DATA INGESTION IN A REAL-TIME | MALHOTRA, SANJEEV | 3691 | §101 | Final Rejection | 55d | Pending | Jan 23, 2024 |
| 18540583 | IDENTIFYING MATERNITY SEVERITY INDEX FOR WOMEN | NEWTON, CHAD A | 3681 | §103 | Final Rejection | 27d | Pending | Dec 14, 2023 |
| 17988505 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR REFINING COLUMN MAPPINGS USING BYTE LEVEL ATTENTION BASED NEURAL MODEL | HAN, JOSEP | 2122 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Nov 16, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial