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
Odivale currently has 1 pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This matter is being reviewed by 1 distinct examiner within a single distinct art unit. The prosecution profile is currently limited to this single point of interaction with the patent office. Such a concentrated profile often indicates a specialized technological focus where the company is seeking protection for a specific core innovation rather than a broad array of disparate technologies.
The busiest examiner, NOBREGA, TATIANA L, is handling the sole pending office action. This action represents the entirety of the company's active prosecution. The focus on a single examiner and art unit suggests a very specific technological application or a nascent patent portfolio. Because the busiest examiner pending count is 1, the company's current patent strategy is highly sensitive to the individual examination practices of this specific reviewer.
With a single distinct examiner and art unit, the company has a streamlined prosecution path. However, this also means there is no diversification of risk across different examiners. Practitioners must be prepared for a highly focused dialogue, as the outcome of this single pending office action will define the company's immediate success in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering space.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| NOBREGA, TATIANA L | 1 | 33.3% | +58.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18716947 | DEVICE FOR DISPENSING A PRODUCT AT THE BASE OF HAIR SHAFTS AND/OR ON THE SCALP | NOBREGA, TATIANA L | 12d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18716947 | DEVICE FOR DISPENSING A PRODUCT AT THE BASE OF HAIR SHAFTS AND/OR ON THE SCALP | NOBREGA, TATIANA L | 12d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3799 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18716947 | DEVICE FOR DISPENSING A PRODUCT AT THE BASE OF HAIR SHAFTS AND/OR ON THE SCALP | NOBREGA, TATIANA L | 3799 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 12d | 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