Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 6 patents granted in the last 365 days
KABO TOOL Company has 2 pending office actions in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. Both of these actions are assigned to 1 distinct examiner, THOMAS, DAVID B, who is also the busiest examiner with 2 pending actions. This indicates a complete concentration of the company's current pending workload under a single reviewer. For the practitioner, this means that the outcomes for both pending actions are dependent on the perspective of THOMAS, DAVID B.
The 2 pending actions are also located within 1 distinct art unit, matching the count of examiners. This creates a highly centralized prosecution environment where all current matters are being processed through the same examiner and the same administrative group. Having 1 examiner manage 2 actions in 1 art unit simplifies the communication chain but increases the risk associated with a single examiner's interpretation of the claims. This focused approach ensures that all current intellectual property efforts in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector are channeled through a single, specialized path within the patent office's organizational structure.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| THOMAS, DAVID B | 1 | 76.8% | +21.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18597442 | RATCHET WRENCH STRUCTURE | THOMAS, DAVID B | 27d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18597442 | RATCHET WRENCH STRUCTURE | THOMAS, DAVID B | 27d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3723 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18597442 | RATCHET WRENCH STRUCTURE | THOMAS, DAVID B | 3723 | §102§103§112 | Final Rejection | 27d | Pending | Mar 06, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial