Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Computing & Software
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 3 patents granted in the last 365 days
Rocket Software Technologies Inc. currently manages 1 pending office action within the Computing & Software technology area. This action is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, SHAH, VAISHALI. The prosecution is centralized in 1 distinct art unit. Because there is only 1 pending office action, the busiest examiner is responsible for 1 pending action.
The focus on 1 distinct art unit suggests a specific technical scope for the company's current patent filings. With SHAH, VAISHALI handling the 1 pending office action, the prosecution strategy is focused on a single point of contact. This means the outcome of the current application is determined by the review of this 1 distinct examiner. The data shows no variation in examiner or art unit assignments.
Practitioners should observe that the 1 pending office action constitutes the entire active workload for the company. The 1 distinct art unit and 1 distinct examiner create a singular prosecution environment. There are no other pending actions to compare against the 1 managed by the busiest examiner. The Computing & Software area provides the technical framework for Rocket Software Technologies Inc.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SHAH, VAISHALI | 1 | 57.4% | +53.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18424311 | Applying Multi-Faceted Trust Scores for Decision Making Using a Decision Table and Predetermined Action Triggering | SHAH, VAISHALI | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18424311 | Applying Multi-Faceted Trust Scores for Decision Making Using a Decision Table and Predetermined Action Triggering | SHAH, VAISHALI | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 2156 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18424311 | Applying Multi-Faceted Trust Scores for Decision Making Using a Decision Table and Predetermined Action Triggering | SHAH, VAISHALI | 2156 | §101§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jan 26, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial