Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Computing & Software
11 pending office actions • 6 art units • 8 examiners • 0 of 11 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 7 patents granted in the last 365 days
Relativity Oda LLC manages a patent portfolio in the Computing & Software technology area, currently featuring 11 pending office actions. This workload is distributed across 8 distinct examiners, suggesting a range of active applications. These applications are further spread across 6 distinct art units, indicating a diverse set of technical sub-specialties within the Computing & Software field. The presence of 6 distinct art units suggests that Relativity Oda LLC's innovations span various technical classifications.
The busiest examiner for the company is BRUCE M MOSER, who is currently managing 3 pending office actions. While BRUCE M MOSER holds the highest individual workload, these 3 actions represent a portion of the total 11 pending office actions. This distribution across 8 distinct examiners highlights a prosecution environment where multiple examiners influence the portfolio's progress. With 8 distinct examiners involved, the company's prosecution outcomes are not heavily dependent on any single individual.
Managing this volume of pending office actions across such an array of 8 distinct examiners requires a coordinated strategy. The diversity in examiners and art units likely results in a variety of examination styles and timelines for the company to navigate. Practitioners should be prepared for different procedural requirements across the 6 distinct art units. This profile reflects a robust and technically varied set of active patent applications in the Computing & Software area.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 6 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.
Every pending office action with a known statutory deadline, placed on a days-until-due axis. Dots left of Today are overdue; the further right, the more runway. Cases that share a deadline window stack vertically. 6 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date.
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 only | 1 (9%) |
| §101 + other | 6 (55%) |
| §103 only | 2 (18%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (18%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MOSER, BRUCE M | 3 | 84.2% | +20.1% |
| ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 2 | 42.2% | +37.8% |
| HOFFMAN, BRANDON S | 1 | 90.5% | +6.4% |
| LYONS, ANDREW M | 1 | 73.7% | +15.6% |
| BEJCEK II, ROBERT H | 1 | 62.8% | +22.5% |
| SITTNER, MATTHEW T | 1 | 57.9% | +56.1% |
| FAAL, BABOUCARR | 1 | 80.6% | +14.3% |
| TSAI, SHENG JEN | 1 | 70.4% | +13.8% |
Cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate of 80%+ where the difficulty is Easy or Medium. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18240778 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTIVE CACHE MANAGEMENT BASED UPON SYSTEM WORKFLOW | FAAL, BABOUCARR | 17d overdue |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 8 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19052157 | Systems and Methods for Prompt Tuning Based on Document Classification | MOSER, BRUCE M | 74d overdue |
| 19052186 | Systems and Methods for Iteratively Updating Classification Prompts | MOSER, BRUCE M | 66d overdue |
| 19052197 | Systems and Methods for Prompt Self-Optimization | MOSER, BRUCE M | 42d overdue |
| 19052192 | Systems and Methods for Generating Initial Prompt Criteria | ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 5d overdue |
| 19052200 | Systems and Methods for Updating a Validation Sample | ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 6d |
| 19052162 | Systems and Methods for Classification Explainability | HOFFMAN, BRANDON S | — |
| 18748814 | Systems and Methods for Evaluating Models Using Candidate Job Analysis | LYONS, ANDREW M | — |
| 18640301 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR USING SYNTHETIC DATA TO TRAIN MACHINE LEARNING MODELS | BEJCEK II, ROBERT H | — |
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 8 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19052157 | Systems and Methods for Prompt Tuning Based on Document Classification | MOSER, BRUCE M | 74d overdue |
| 19052186 | Systems and Methods for Iteratively Updating Classification Prompts | MOSER, BRUCE M | 66d overdue |
| 19052197 | Systems and Methods for Prompt Self-Optimization | MOSER, BRUCE M | 42d overdue |
| 18240778 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTIVE CACHE MANAGEMENT BASED UPON SYSTEM WORKFLOW | FAAL, BABOUCARR | 17d overdue |
| 19052192 | Systems and Methods for Generating Initial Prompt Criteria | ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 5d overdue |
| 19052200 | Systems and Methods for Updating a Validation Sample | ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 6d |
| 18748814 | Systems and Methods for Evaluating Models Using Candidate Job Analysis | LYONS, ANDREW M | — |
| 18640301 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR USING SYNTHETIC DATA TO TRAIN MACHINE LEARNING MODELS | BEJCEK II, ROBERT H | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 2154 | 3 |
| 2169 | 2 |
| 2191 | 1 |
| 3629 | 1 |
| 2138 | 1 |
| 2139 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19052186 | Systems and Methods for Iteratively Updating Classification Prompts | MOSER, BRUCE M | 2154 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | 66d overdue | Pending | Feb 12, 2025 |
| 19052200 | Systems and Methods for Updating a Validation Sample | ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 2169 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | 6d | Pending | Feb 12, 2025 |
| 19052157 | Systems and Methods for Prompt Tuning Based on Document Classification | MOSER, BRUCE M | 2154 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | 74d overdue | Pending | Feb 12, 2025 |
| 19052162 | Systems and Methods for Classification Explainability | HOFFMAN, BRANDON S | — | §101§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 12, 2025 |
| 19052192 | Systems and Methods for Generating Initial Prompt Criteria | ALLEN, BRITTANY N | 2169 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | 5d overdue | Pending | Feb 12, 2025 |
| 19052197 | Systems and Methods for Prompt Self-Optimization | MOSER, BRUCE M | 2154 | §101 | Final Rejection | 42d overdue | Pending | Feb 12, 2025 |
| 18748814 | Systems and Methods for Evaluating Models Using Candidate Job Analysis | LYONS, ANDREW M | 2191 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 20, 2024 |
| 18640301 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR USING SYNTHETIC DATA TO TRAIN MACHINE LEARNING MODELS | BEJCEK II, ROBERT H | — | §101§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Apr 19, 2024 |
| 18595261 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING STOPPING POINT | SITTNER, MATTHEW T | 3629 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Mar 04, 2024 |
| 18240778 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTIVE CACHE MANAGEMENT BASED UPON SYSTEM WORKFLOW | FAAL, BABOUCARR | 2138 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 17d overdue | Pending | Aug 31, 2023 |
| 17867347 | QUEUE OPTIMIZATION VIA PREDICITIVE CACHING IN CLOUD COMPUTING | TSAI, SHENG JEN | 2139 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jul 18, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial