Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Iodine Software LLC currently has 2 pending office actions within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. Both of these actions are concentrated within 1 distinct art unit, indicating a very specific technical focus for the company's current patent applications. The prosecution of these 2 pending actions is handled by 2 distinct examiners, meaning that each case is being reviewed by a different individual.
The busiest examiner, GO, JOHN PHILIP, is responsible for only 1 pending office action, which is half of the total pending inventory. This distribution shows that there is no concentration of cases under a single examiner, requiring the company to manage two separate examiner relationships even within the same art unit. The lack of examiner overlap means that the company must address two unique perspectives for its 2 pending actions.
With only 1 distinct art unit involved, the company's 2 pending office actions are subject to the specific procedural standards of a single USPTO division. However, the fact that GO, JOHN PHILIP and the other examiner each hold only 1 action requires a strategy that accounts for individual examiner differences. This decentralized approach is necessary to resolve the 2 pending office actions within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems sector.
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 + 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| TIEDEMAN, JASON S | 1 | 28.5% | +34.9% |
| GO, JOHN PHILIP | 1 | 34.1% | +43.1% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19221351 | CLINICAL SUMMARY SYSTEMS AND METHODS | TIEDEMAN, JASON S | — |
| 19221306 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PATIENT STATUS PREDICTION | GO, JOHN PHILIP | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19221351 | CLINICAL SUMMARY SYSTEMS AND METHODS | TIEDEMAN, JASON S | — |
| 19221306 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PATIENT STATUS PREDICTION | GO, JOHN PHILIP | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3681 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19221351 | CLINICAL SUMMARY SYSTEMS AND METHODS | TIEDEMAN, JASON S | — | §101§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | May 28, 2025 |
| 19221306 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PATIENT STATUS PREDICTION | GO, JOHN PHILIP | 3681 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | May 28, 2025 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial