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 • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days
Institut Régional Du Cancer De Montpellier currently manages 1 pending office action in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This case is assigned to AEDER, SEAN E, who is the busiest examiner for the institute. The portfolio's active workload is concentrated under 1 distinct examiner and a single distinct art unit.
This suggests a targeted approach to its current biotech-related filings. The resolution of the 1 pending office action will be the primary factor in the institute's near-term success within this technology area. Practitioners should analyze the specific history of AEDER, SEAN E to optimize the response for the active matter.
The concentration in a single art unit indicates a specialized technical focus that has not yet branched into broader pharmaceutical disciplines. Because the entire active workload resides with an individual examiner, the institute's strategy is highly sensitive to the specific requirements of that official. Future filings may eventually diversify the portfolio across more units as the institute expands its intellectual property footprint.
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) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| AEDER, SEAN E | 1 | 57.0% | +19.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18355853 | METHOD FOR SCREENING A SUBJECT FOR CANCER | AEDER, SEAN E | 62d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18355853 | METHOD FOR SCREENING A SUBJECT FOR CANCER | AEDER, SEAN E | 62d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1642 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18355853 | METHOD FOR SCREENING A SUBJECT FOR CANCER | AEDER, SEAN E | 1642 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 62d | Pending | Jul 20, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial