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
Perfusion Tech Aps maintains 1 pending office action in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This prosecution activity involves a distinct examiner and a distinct art unit. The data reflects a specific focus for the company's current patenting efforts, with no other active matters reported. Such a concentrated workload allows for a prosecution strategy directed at an individual technical advancement.
PEHLKE, CAROLYN A serves as the busiest examiner, managing 1 pending office action. This represents the total volume for Perfusion Tech Aps, concentrating the pending workload under an examiner's review. Working within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area, the company relies on this specific examiner's assessment for its current patent goals. The outcome of this pending office action is the primary factor in the company's near-term patent office results.
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 |
|---|---|
| §101 + other | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PEHLKE, CAROLYN A | 1 | 62.2% | +27.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19322195 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING AN ABNORMAL PERFUSION PATTERN | PEHLKE, CAROLYN A | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19322195 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING AN ABNORMAL PERFUSION PATTERN | PEHLKE, CAROLYN A | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3799 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19322195 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING AN ABNORMAL PERFUSION PATTERN | PEHLKE, CAROLYN A | 3799 | §101§102§112Other | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 08, 2025 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial