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
Joseph Covelli maintains a patent portfolio with 1 pending office action in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. This single matter is being reviewed by 1 distinct examiner, Daniel D. Yabut. The prosecution is localized within 1 distinct art unit, indicating a highly focused technical and administrative scope for the current pending application.
Daniel D. Yabut is identified as the busiest examiner for this portfolio, currently managing 1 pending office action. Because there is only 1 pending office action and 1 distinct examiner, the company's entire current prosecution effort is concentrated in this single interaction. This concentration allows for a very specific and dedicated approach to resolving the outstanding issues in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems area.
For a patent practitioner, the presence of 1 pending office action in 1 distinct art unit means that the prosecution strategy is entirely dependent on the preferences of 1 distinct examiner. There are no other pending matters to provide broader context or alternative paths within the office. Success in this portfolio relies on a precise understanding of the specific requirements of Daniel D. Yabut within the 1 distinct 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 |
|---|---|
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| YABUT, DANIEL D | 1 | 56.7% | +26.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18775143 | DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AIRCRAFT AND METHODS FOR POWERING THE SAME | YABUT, DANIEL D | 32d 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18775143 | DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AIRCRAFT AND METHODS FOR POWERING THE SAME | YABUT, DANIEL D | 32d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3617 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18775143 | DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AIRCRAFT AND METHODS FOR POWERING THE SAME | YABUT, DANIEL D | 3617 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 32d overdue | Pending | Jul 17, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial