Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days
Reputation Com Inc. is currently managing 2 pending office actions in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct examiners, yet they both fall within 1 distinct art unit. This indicates that while the company is dealing with different individuals, the technical oversight remains concentrated within a single administrative division of the patent office. This can lead to a more consistent application of technical standards despite the involvement of 2 different people.
The busiest examiner, WHITAKER, ANDREW B, is responsible for 1 pending office action. Given that the total number of pending actions is 2 and there are 2 distinct examiners, each examiner is handling exactly 1 matter. This distribution prevents any single examiner from having total control over the company's pending Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems applications. However, the fact that both examiners operate within 1 art unit means the company must still adhere to the specific policies of that 1 unit.
Practitioners should note that having 2 examiners for 2 pending actions provides a small degree of variety in prosecution experience. Because the 1 art unit is the common denominator, the company may find that the examiners share similar prior art resources or internal guidelines. This balance between 2 examiners and 1 art unit allows for a focused yet slightly diversified approach to securing patent rights in this technology sector.
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 (50%) |
| §101 + other | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WHITAKER, ANDREW B | 1 | 18.6% | +19.0% |
| PRATT, EHRIN LARMONT | 1 | 15.3% | +13.0% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18484916 | VIRALITY CAUSE DETERMINATION | WHITAKER, ANDREW B | — |
| 17364643 | DETERMINING THEMES | PRATT, EHRIN LARMONT | — |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18484916 | VIRALITY CAUSE DETERMINATION | WHITAKER, ANDREW B | — |
| 17364643 | DETERMINING THEMES | PRATT, EHRIN LARMONT | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3629 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18484916 | VIRALITY CAUSE DETERMINATION | WHITAKER, ANDREW B | 3629 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Oct 11, 2023 |
| 17364643 | DETERMINING THEMES | PRATT, EHRIN LARMONT | 3629 | §101 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 30, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial