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 • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Owen Mumford Ltd. is prosecuting a patent portfolio in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. The portfolio currently contains 1 pending office action. This single action is handled by 1 distinct examiner and is located within 1 distinct art unit, representing a concentrated technical and administrative focus for the company's active US applications in this sector.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE, who is responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending action. Since there is only 1 pending office action in total, SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE manages the entire active workload for the company. This indicates that the current prosecution outcomes for Owen Mumford Ltd. in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering field are dependent on the specific examination of this 1 pending matter.
Practitioners should focus their efforts on the 1 distinct examiner and the procedural expectations of the 1 distinct art unit. With no other pending actions or examiners involved, there is no broader portfolio data to suggest a varied prosecution strategy. The resolution of the 1 pending office action by SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE will be the defining event for the portfolio's current status.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE | 1 | 58.4% | +36.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18707110 | SYRINGE IDENTIFICATION | SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18707110 | SYRINGE IDENTIFICATION | SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3783 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18707110 | SYRINGE IDENTIFICATION | SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE | 3783 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | May 02, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial