Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Senoguard Inc. operates within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area, where it currently faces 1 pending office action. This single action indicates a focused prosecution effort, likely centered on a specific innovation or a small set of related claims. The concentration of the portfolio is further reflected in the involvement of 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit.
The use of 1 distinct art unit suggests that the company's technology falls into a specific classification that is consistently reviewed by the same group of experts. For the practitioner, this 1 distinct examiner represents the sole point of contact for the current active application. This environment allows for a highly specialized dialogue between the applicant and the USPTO regarding the 1 pending office action.
FOWLER, DANIEL WAYNE is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, currently overseeing 1 busiest examiner pending office action. Because this 1 busiest examiner pending office action is the only one currently active, the prosecution strategy must be entirely aligned with the expectations of FOWLER, DANIEL WAYNE. Efficiently addressing the concerns of this specific examiner is the most direct path to advancing the company's interests in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FOWLER, DANIEL WAYNE | 1 | 72.7% | +12.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18548064 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MARGINAL ABLATION IN TISSUE CAVITY | FOWLER, DANIEL WAYNE | 56d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18548064 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MARGINAL ABLATION IN TISSUE CAVITY | FOWLER, DANIEL WAYNE | 56d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3794 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18548064 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MARGINAL ABLATION IN TISSUE CAVITY | FOWLER, DANIEL WAYNE | 3794 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 56d | Pending | Aug 25, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial