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
Panexo Biotech Sg Pte. Ltd. currently manages 1 pending office action within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, Pipic, Alma, who is the busiest examiner for the portfolio. The prosecution activity is located in a distinct art unit. This indicates the examination path for the company's current intellectual property assets.
With the distinct examiner involved, the portfolio's immediate outcomes depend on the requirements of this individual official. The alignment of the pending office action with the art unit indicates the administrative process. Practitioners should prepare for the review style of Pipic, Alma, as all active work is centralized under this official. This arrangement means the company does not navigate multiple departmental standards within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector for its active matter. This centralization allows for a focus on the specific examiner's criteria. The administrative structure is defined by the examiner and the art unit assigned to the case.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PIPIC, ALMA | 1 | 54.6% | +54.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18704916 | USE OF MILK EXOSOME IN PREPARATION OF DRUG CARRIER | PIPIC, ALMA | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18704916 | USE OF MILK EXOSOME IN PREPARATION OF DRUG CARRIER | PIPIC, ALMA | 12d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1617 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18704916 | USE OF MILK EXOSOME IN PREPARATION OF DRUG CARRIER | PIPIC, ALMA | 1617 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 12d | Pending | Apr 25, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial