Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Ninebell Healthcare Co., Ltd. currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. This workload is distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, indicating a spread of examination for the active matters. The presence of 2 distinct art units suggests that the portfolio covers different technical aspects within its technology area, requiring the applicant to navigate different departmental interpretations.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is HARE, DAVID R, who is responsible for 1 of the pending office actions. Because the total number of pending office actions is 2 and the busiest examiner handles 1, the prosecution responsibility is split between the 2 distinct examiners involved. This distribution limits the impact of any single examiner's specific tendencies on the overall portfolio progress. Practitioners should prepare for different examination styles across these units to ensure protection for the company's mechanical and transportation innovations.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 |
|---|---|
| §112 only | 1 (50%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HARE, DAVID R | 1 | 67.6% | +32.5% |
| ORTEGA, MARTIN NATHAN | 1 | 25.9% | +34.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18299824 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGECE-BASED POSTURE DISCRIMINATION DEVICE USING BODY PRESSURE SENSORS AND METHOD THEREOF | ORTEGA, MARTIN NATHAN | 52d 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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18299824 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGECE-BASED POSTURE DISCRIMINATION DEVICE USING BODY PRESSURE SENSORS AND METHOD THEREOF | ORTEGA, MARTIN NATHAN | 52d overdue |
| 18764366 | PRESSURE ULCER PREVENTION BED USING BODY PRESSURE SENSORS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF | HARE, DAVID R | 39d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3673 | 1 |
| 3791 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18764366 | PRESSURE ULCER PREVENTION BED USING BODY PRESSURE SENSORS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF | HARE, DAVID R | 3673 | §112 | Final Rejection | 39d | Pending | Jul 05, 2024 |
| 18299824 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGECE-BASED POSTURE DISCRIMINATION DEVICE USING BODY PRESSURE SENSORS AND METHOD THEREOF | ORTEGA, MARTIN NATHAN | 3791 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 52d overdue | Pending | Apr 13, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial