Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Innoventions Ltd. currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This workload is distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, indicating a diverse prosecution landscape for the company. HOLLM, JONATHAN ADAM is identified as the busiest examiner, currently handling 1 pending office action.
Since 2 pending office actions are split between different examiners, the company's success in this technology area is not dependent on a single individual. This distribution suggests that the company is navigating multiple procedural paths simultaneously within the patent office. Practitioners should monitor the distinct requirements of both art units to ensure a cohesive strategy. The presence of 2 distinct examiners allows for a broader range of feedback on the company's technical claims compared to a more centralized portfolio.
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 |
|---|---|
| §112 only | 1 (50%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOLLM, JONATHAN ADAM | 1 | 50.4% | +53.3% |
| TRAN, JULIE THI | 1 | 33.3% | +70.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18090093 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSERTING AND REMOVING AN EXPANDABLE DEVICE IN A BODY CAVITY | HOLLM, JONATHAN ADAM | 4d overdue |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17417433 | INTRAVESICULAR DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING URINARY INCONTINENCE | TRAN, JULIE THI | 46d overdue |
| 18090093 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSERTING AND REMOVING AN EXPANDABLE DEVICE IN A BODY CAVITY | HOLLM, JONATHAN ADAM | 4d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3771 | 1 |
| 3791 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18090093 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSERTING AND REMOVING AN EXPANDABLE DEVICE IN A BODY CAVITY | HOLLM, JONATHAN ADAM | 3771 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | 4d overdue | Pending | Dec 28, 2022 |
| 17417433 | INTRAVESICULAR DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING URINARY INCONTINENCE | TRAN, JULIE THI | 3791 | §112 | Final Rejection | 46d overdue | Pending | Jun 23, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial