Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
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
Reflex Marine Ltd. has 1 pending office action in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and a single art unit. The company's current prosecution activity is focused on this single application, reflecting a targeted approach to its intellectual property in the transportation sector.
Sean D Andrish is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, currently managing the pending office action. This single action represents the full extent of the company's active prosecution. The progress of the company's patent portfolio is currently tied to the resolution of this one specific case under the review of this examiner.
The concentration in a single art unit and examiner allows for a focused prosecution strategy. There is no need to manage multiple examiner relationships or different divisional policies. However, it also means that the company's immediate patent goals depend entirely on the outcome of the active action. Practitioners should focus on the specific feedback from this examiner to advance the application.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANDRISH, SEAN D | 1 | 71.5% | +32.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18878920 | METHOD FOR INSTALLING AN ANCHORING SYSTEM | ANDRISH, SEAN D | 84d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18878920 | METHOD FOR INSTALLING AN ANCHORING SYSTEM | ANDRISH, SEAN D | 84d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3678 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18878920 | METHOD FOR INSTALLING AN ANCHORING SYSTEM | ANDRISH, SEAN D | 3678 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 84d | Pending | Dec 26, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial