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
Thomas J.C. Matzen GmbH operates within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area with a portfolio currently showing 1 pending office action. This single action is handled by 1 distinct examiner, reflecting a highly focused prosecution state. The concentration of the work within 1 distinct art unit suggests that the company's current legal efforts are centralized in one specific regulatory environment.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is BICKHAM, DAWN MARIE, who is responsible for the 1 busiest examiner pending action. Having only 1 distinct examiner means that the outcome of the company's current prosecution depends entirely on the review of this individual. This lack of examiner diversity simplifies the communication process, as the practitioner only needs to manage a single relationship within the USPTO.
In the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector, technical complexity is common, yet this portfolio remains streamlined with just 1 pending office action. The use of 1 distinct art unit ensures that the examination follows a consistent set of internal guidelines. For the practitioner, this means that the 1 pending office action can be addressed with a strategy tailored specifically to the preferences of BICKHAM, DAWN MARIE without competing priorities from other examiners.
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 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BICKHAM, DAWN MARIE | 1 | 46.2% | +64.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17283775 | METHOD AND DEVICES FOR AGE DETERMINATION | BICKHAM, DAWN MARIE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17283775 | METHOD AND DEVICES FOR AGE DETERMINATION | BICKHAM, DAWN MARIE | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1685 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17283775 | METHOD AND DEVICES FOR AGE DETERMINATION | BICKHAM, DAWN MARIE | 1685 | §101 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Apr 08, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial