Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Merdury Biopharmaceutical Corporation is managing 1 pending office action in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This action is being reviewed by 1 distinct examiner. The prosecution is currently limited to 1 distinct art unit, indicating a specific technical classification for the pending matter. This focus within 1 distinct art unit and with 1 distinct examiner suggests a highly targeted prosecution effort for the company's current active filing, which can lead to a more predictable examination process.
STEINKE, SEAN JAMES is the busiest examiner, holding 1 pending office action. This single action represents the total of 1 pending office actions for the company. The presence of only 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit means the company's current prosecution workload is entirely centralized. Because the busiest examiner pending count of 1 equals the total number of actions, the company's entire active docket is currently under the review of STEINKE, SEAN JAMES. This centralized structure allows the applicant to focus their resources on a single examiner relationship to advance their intellectual property goals.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 1 | 12.5% | +42.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18736095 | ORAL PEPTIDE DRUG STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18736095 | ORAL PEPTIDE DRUG STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1619 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18736095 | ORAL PEPTIDE DRUG STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 1619 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 06, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial