Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026

Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation

Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals

3 pending office actions • 2 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days

Analysis

Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation currently manages 3 pending office actions within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These actions are distributed among 3 distinct examiners, showing some variety in the prosecution staff assigned to the portfolio. Nelson B Moseley II is the busiest examiner for the company, overseeing 1 pending office action. The portfolio also spans 2 distinct art units.

For a practitioner, the distribution of actions across multiple examiners suggests that the portfolio is not dependent on a single individual's perspective. The presence of 2 distinct art units indicates that the foundation is engaging with different specialized groups within the patent office. This can be beneficial for diversifying risk, as a negative trend in one art unit may not affect the entire portfolio. However, it also requires managing different examination styles and timelines.

The focus on the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area remains a core component of the foundation's intellectual property strategy. With 3 pending office actions, the foundation must coordinate its responses to ensure consistency across different examiners. Practitioners should monitor the specific tendencies of each assigned examiner to optimize the chances of allowance across these varied prosecution paths. This multi-examiner approach requires a robust tracking system to maintain a unified legal position.

Written from this page's own data; every figure is computed from USPTO records and verified before publication.

Portfolio Summary

3
Total Pending OAs
2
Non-Final OAs
1
Final Rejections
0
Advisory / Quayle

Response Deadline Pressure

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.

0
Overdue
1
Due this week
0
Due this month
0
Due in next 60 days
0
Due later

Case Difficulty Mix

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.

2
Hard (67%)
0
Medium (0%)
1
Easy (33%)
0
Unknown (0%)

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
§101 + other1 (33%)
§112 only1 (33%)
Multi-statute (no §101)1 (33%)

Industry Mix

How the docket's pending cases split across USPTO tech-center bands.

2
Life Sciences
67% of docket
0
Information Tech
0% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
0
Semiconductors
0% of docket
0
Mechanical / Eng
0% of docket
1
Business / Other
33% of docket

Time-on-OA Estimate

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.

30 h
Manual time on pending OAs
6 h
Time saved (low, 20%)
10 h
Time saved (mid, 35%)
0.3 wks
FTE-weeks freed (mid)

Top Examiners on this docket

ExaminerApps on this docketAllow rateInterview lift
MOSELEY II, NELSON B 1 68.0% +41.5%
KONOPKA, CATHERINE ANNE 1 58.1% +65.0%
COUNTS, GARY W 1 58.9% +29.5%

Hard Cases (2)

Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
18016384 METHOD FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS (SLE) PATIENT IS UNDERGOING A PRE-FLARE EVENT COUNTS, GARY W 5d
18411242 COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING OSTEOARTHRITIS USING A CD14 INHIBITOR MOSELEY II, NELSON B —

Interview Candidates (3)

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 #TitleExaminerDue in
18016384 METHOD FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS (SLE) PATIENT IS UNDERGOING A PRE-FLARE EVENT COUNTS, GARY W 5d
18411242 COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING OSTEOARTHRITIS USING A CD14 INHIBITOR MOSELEY II, NELSON B —
18506519 PROX1 PREVENTS MYXOMATOUS VALVE DISEASE BY INHIBITING PDGF-B SIGNALING KONOPKA, CATHERINE ANNE —

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
1635 1
1678 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
18411242 COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING OSTEOARTHRITIS USING A CD14 INHIBITOR MOSELEY II, NELSON B — §103§112 Non-Final OA — Pending Jan 12, 2024
18506519 PROX1 PREVENTS MYXOMATOUS VALVE DISEASE BY INHIBITING PDGF-B SIGNALING KONOPKA, CATHERINE ANNE 1635 §112 Non-Final OA — Pending Nov 10, 2023
18016384 METHOD FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS (SLE) PATIENT IS UNDERGOING A PRE-FLARE EVENT COUNTS, GARY W 1678 §101§103 Final Rejection 5d Pending Jan 16, 2023

Managing Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation's Patent Portfolio?

IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.

Start Free Trial

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month