Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
3 pending office actions • 3 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Jemella Limited is currently navigating 3 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These 3 actions are distributed across distinct examiners, meaning no single examiner is handling multiple matters. Furthermore, the portfolio is spread across distinct art units, indicating a range of technical classifications for the pending applications. This alignment of actions with the art units suggests that each filing faces a unique set of technical challenges.
WOODHOUSE, SARAH ANN is identified as the busiest examiner with 1 busiest examiner pending action. Since there are distinct examiners for the pending office actions, the workload is spread across the group. The presence of the distinct art units suggests that Jemella Limited faces varied examination standards across its current filings. Practitioners should prepare for different perspectives, as each of the pending office actions is handled by a different examiner in a different art unit.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 1 (33%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WOODHOUSE, SARAH ANN | 1 | 29.3% | +65.0% |
| STEITZ, RACHEL RUNNING | 1 | 54.4% | +26.1% |
| NGUYEN, BAO D | 1 | 54.3% | +27.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19109441 | APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR STYLING HAIR | WOODHOUSE, SARAH ANN | — |
| 18259025 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DRYING AND STYLING HAIR | NGUYEN, BAO D | — |
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 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18723401 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DRYING AND STYLING HAIR | STEITZ, RACHEL RUNNING | 75d |
| 19109441 | APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR STYLING HAIR | WOODHOUSE, SARAH ANN | — |
| 18259025 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DRYING AND STYLING HAIR | NGUYEN, BAO D | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3772 | 1 |
| 3700 | 1 |
| 3762 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19109441 | APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR STYLING HAIR | WOODHOUSE, SARAH ANN | 3772 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Mar 06, 2025 |
| 18723401 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DRYING AND STYLING HAIR | STEITZ, RACHEL RUNNING | 3700 | §103 | Final Rejection | 75d | Pending | Jun 21, 2024 |
| 18259025 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DRYING AND STYLING HAIR | NGUYEN, BAO D | 3762 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 22, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial