Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
3 pending office actions • 2 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 4 patents granted in the last 365 days
Minerva Biotechnologies Corporation has 3 pending office actions in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These actions are assigned to 3 distinct examiners. The prosecution effort is distributed across 2 distinct art units. This indicates that the company's applications are being reviewed by multiple examiners within specialized technical groups, which may lead to overlap in technical requirements.
HUYNH, PHUONG N is the busiest examiner, holding 1 pending office action. With 3 pending actions and 3 distinct examiners, each examiner is responsible for a single application. The involvement of 2 distinct art units means that at least two of the applications are being evaluated by the same technical group, while the 3 distinct examiners ensure a variety of individual perspectives. This structure requires a prosecution strategy that can adapt to 3 different examiner styles while accounting for the technical standards of 2 different art units. Practitioners should monitor for cross-application consistency within the 2 distinct art units.
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%) |
| Double-patenting only | 1 (33%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (33%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HUYNH, PHUONG N | 1 | 65.7% | +53.6% |
| JOHNSON, KARA D | 1 | 69.5% | +24.6% |
| NGUYEN, QUANG | 1 | 38.0% | +52.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18807461 | METHODS FOR DERIVING DOPAMINERGIC NEURONS FROM PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS | JOHNSON, KARA 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14596051 | METHOD FOR INDUCING CELLS TO LESS MATURE STATE | NGUYEN, QUANG | 79d overdue |
| 19098802 | ANTI-MUC1* ANTIBODY DRUG COMPLEXES AND USES THEREOF | HUYNH, PHUONG N | — |
| 18807461 | METHODS FOR DERIVING DOPAMINERGIC NEURONS FROM PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS | JOHNSON, KARA D | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1643 | 1 |
| 1631 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19098802 | ANTI-MUC1* ANTIBODY DRUG COMPLEXES AND USES THEREOF | HUYNH, PHUONG N | 1643 | DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Apr 02, 2025 |
| 18807461 | METHODS FOR DERIVING DOPAMINERGIC NEURONS FROM PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS | JOHNSON, KARA D | — | §102§112Other | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Aug 16, 2024 |
| 14596051 | METHOD FOR INDUCING CELLS TO LESS MATURE STATE | NGUYEN, QUANG | 1631 | §103Other | Final Rejection | 79d overdue | Pending | Jan 13, 2015 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial