Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Tensor Biosciences Inc. currently manages 1 pending office action within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This active matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, indicating a concentrated prosecution footprint. The focus of the portfolio remains narrow as all current activity is centralized within a specific administrative division of the patent office.
The busiest examiner for the company is HOPPE, EMMA RUTH, who is responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending action. This represents the entirety of the company's current pending workload. Practitioners should note that the prosecution strategy is presently tied to the evaluation of 1 distinct examiner, which limits the diversity of feedback across the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector. The concentration in 1 distinct art unit suggests that the company's intellectual property is currently being scrutinized under specific examination guidelines tailored to its technological niche. This 1 pending office action serves as the primary focal point for the company's current patent strategy.
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 |
|---|---|
| §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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOPPE, EMMA RUTH | 1 | 42.1% | +56.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18254433 | METHODS FOR CLASSIFICATION OF LIVER DISEASE | HOPPE, EMMA RUTH | 146d overdue |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18254433 | METHODS FOR CLASSIFICATION OF LIVER DISEASE | HOPPE, EMMA RUTH | 146d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1683 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18254433 | METHODS FOR CLASSIFICATION OF LIVER DISEASE | HOPPE, EMMA RUTH | 1683 | §101§102§103§112Other | Non-Final OA | 146d overdue | Pending | May 25, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial