Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
3 pending office actions • 3 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
The Washington University is currently managing 3 pending office actions within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This workload is distributed across 3 distinct art units, which indicates a diverse range of technical subject matter within the university's patent applications. The presence of 3 pending office actions suggests an active and ongoing engagement with the patent office in this specific sector.
The prosecution effort involves 3 distinct examiners, ensuring that the university's intellectual property is being reviewed by multiple individuals. Among these, the busiest examiner is MARCETICH, ADAM M, who is currently handling 1 pending office action. Because each of the 3 examiners is managing a portion of the workload, the university's prosecution risk is spread across different perspectives within the patent office. Practitioners should note that the 1 pending action assigned to the busiest examiner represents a portion of the total pending workload. This distribution across 3 distinct examiners and 3 distinct art units suggests a broad and varied prosecution strategy for the university.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 | 2 (67%) |
| §103 only | 1 (33%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MARCETICH, ADAM M | 1 | 72.7% | +18.8% |
| MYERS, CARLA J | 1 | 49.3% | +46.1% |
| PAGUIO FRISING, MICHELLE F | 1 | 71.1% | +39.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17947871 | LYMPHATIC FLUID FOR DIAGNOSTICS | MYERS, CARLA J | 30d overdue |
| 17947861 | METHODS FOR DISEASE ASSESSMENT USING DRAIN FLUID | PAGUIO FRISING, MICHELLE F | 22d |
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 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17947871 | LYMPHATIC FLUID FOR DIAGNOSTICS | MYERS, CARLA J | 30d overdue |
| 17947861 | METHODS FOR DISEASE ASSESSMENT USING DRAIN FLUID | PAGUIO FRISING, MICHELLE F | 22d |
| 17947881 | DUAL PORT DRAIN | MARCETICH, ADAM M | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3781 | 1 |
| 1682 | 1 |
| 1651 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17947881 | DUAL PORT DRAIN | MARCETICH, ADAM M | 3781 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 19, 2022 |
| 17947871 | LYMPHATIC FLUID FOR DIAGNOSTICS | MYERS, CARLA J | 1682 | §101§103§112DP | Final Rejection | 30d overdue | Pending | Sep 19, 2022 |
| 17947861 | METHODS FOR DISEASE ASSESSMENT USING DRAIN FLUID | PAGUIO FRISING, MICHELLE F | 1651 | §101DP | Non-Final OA | 22d | Pending | Sep 19, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial