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
Mountain Peak Technology Ltd. has 1 pending office action in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This action is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and is being processed within 1 distinct art unit. This focused prosecution profile indicates that the company's current patenting efforts are concentrated on a specific biological or pharmaceutical innovation.
With 1 distinct examiner handling the 1 pending office action, the company can maintain a singular focus on the requirements of this individual. This avoids the need to manage multiple prosecution timelines or different examiner preferences across the patent office. Practitioners can tailor their arguments to the specific standards of the 1 distinct art unit involved.
STEINKE, SEAN JAMES is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, currently overseeing 1 pending office action. As the only examiner listed, STEINKE, SEAN JAMES is responsible for the 1 busiest examiner pending action. The outcome of this 1 pending office action will be the determining factor for the company's immediate success in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals area.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18317047 | STABLE COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING A CANNABINOID | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 16d 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18317047 | STABLE COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING A CANNABINOID | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 16d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1619 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18317047 | STABLE COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING A CANNABINOID | STEINKE, SEAN JAMES | 1619 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 16d overdue | Pending | May 12, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial