Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Phenox GmbH has 2 pending office actions distributed across the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. The portfolio is currently being reviewed by 2 distinct examiners working within 2 distinct art units. This distribution indicates that the company is navigating different examination environments simultaneously. HO, TAN-UYEN THI is the busiest examiner with 1 busiest examiner pending action. Because the 2 pending office actions are split between different art units, the prosecution team must adapt to the specific guidelines and precedents of two separate administrative groups.
This diversity in examiners requires a flexible approach to responding to rejections, as the 2 distinct examiners may have varying interpretations of the prior art. Managing the workload across 2 distinct art units requires more coordination than a centralized portfolio. The applicant must ensure that arguments made to HO, TAN-UYEN THI do not conflict with those presented to the other examiner. Since the technology area is Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering, the 2 distinct examiners likely focus on different mechanical aspects of the claims. Success in this portfolio depends on successfully managing these 2 distinct examiners and their respective art units.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 1 (50%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HO, TAN-UYEN THI | 1 | 24.1% | +14.8% |
| PROCTOR, CACHET I | 1 | 77.1% | +5.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18272434 | Thrombectomy Device | HO, TAN-UYEN THI | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18272434 | Thrombectomy Device | HO, TAN-UYEN THI | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3771 | 1 |
| 1712 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18272434 | Thrombectomy Device | HO, TAN-UYEN THI | 3771 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jan 04, 2024 |
| 18275494 | Coated Medical Product and Method for Coating a Medical Product | PROCTOR, CACHET I | 1712 | §103 | Final Rejection | 14d | Pending | Aug 02, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial