Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
John Morrish Limited has 1 pending office action in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. This action is being handled by a distinct examiner within 1 distinct art unit. HOGE, Gary Chapman is the busiest examiner for the company, currently managing the 1 pending office action. The concentration of the matter under a single examiner and art unit suggests a very focused prosecution effort. This structure allows for a consistent dialogue between the applicant and HOGE, Gary Chapman. The 1 distinct art unit provides the specific technical framework for the pending matter.
Having only a single pending office action means the company can dedicate its resources to a specific set of examiner requirements. The Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area encompasses the technical scope of the active matter. HOGE, Gary Chapman is the sole examiner responsible for the prosecution currently active. This unique art unit likely contains the specialized knowledge required for the company's transportation-related innovations. The distinct examiner and art unit represent the entire current interaction with the patent office. This centralized approach can simplify the management of the pending office action.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOGE, GARY CHAPMAN | 1 | 63.6% | +22.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18939225 | PICTURE FRAME | HOGE, GARY CHAPMAN | 18d 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 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18939225 | PICTURE FRAME | HOGE, GARY CHAPMAN | 18d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3631 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18939225 | PICTURE FRAME | HOGE, GARY CHAPMAN | 3631 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | 18d overdue | Pending | Nov 06, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial