Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
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
Snvia Co. Ltd. currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These matters are being processed through 1 distinct art unit, suggesting that while the company has multiple actions, they are focused within a single technical group at the patent office. The prosecution involves 2 distinct examiners, which introduces different individual perspectives into the review of the company's technology. This concentration within a single art unit allows for a more focused technical dialogue with the patent office.
HALL, DEANNA K is the busiest examiner for the company, with 1 pending office action currently assigned. This represents one of the 2 pending office actions currently facing the portfolio. Since both actions are within the distinct art unit but handled by the 2 distinct examiners, the company may experience different examination styles even while remaining within the same technical division for Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering. This requires a strategy that accounts for individual examiner tendencies within a unified technical framework.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 1 (50%) |
| §102 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HALL, DEANNA K | 1 | 75.7% | +15.7% |
| DARB, HAMZA A. | 1 | 74.4% | +30.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17754409 | IMPLANTABLE SUBSTANCE DELIVERY VEHICLE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR | DARB, HAMZA A. | 28d overdue |
| 18529219 | IMPLANTABLE MICRONEEDLE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR | HALL, DEANNA K | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3783 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18529219 | IMPLANTABLE MICRONEEDLE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR | HALL, DEANNA K | 3783 | §102 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Dec 05, 2023 |
| 17754409 | IMPLANTABLE SUBSTANCE DELIVERY VEHICLE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR | DARB, HAMZA A. | 3783 | §103 | Final Rejection | 28d overdue | Pending | Mar 31, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial