Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Université De Lorraine currently has 2 pending office actions within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These actions are handled by 2 distinct examiners, meaning each pending matter is being reviewed by a different individual. However, both actions are concentrated within 1 distinct art unit, which indicates a very specific technical focus for the university's current biological and pharmaceutical patent applications.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is LABAZE, EDWYN, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. Since there are 2 pending office actions in total, the workload is split between LABAZE, EDWYN and the other distinct examiner. This distribution requires the applicant to adapt to different examiner styles while remaining within the procedural framework of 1 distinct art unit. The focus on Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals provides a consistent technical context for both actions.
With 2 pending office actions and 2 distinct examiners, the prosecution workload is small and manageable. The fact that both examiners are located in a single art unit is a significant advantage, as it likely leads to more consistent technical requirements and examination standards. Practitioners can focus on the specific feedback from LABAZE, EDWYN and his colleague to advance these filings. This concentrated environment within the biotechnology sector allows for a clear and targeted approach to securing patent rights.
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%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| LABAZE, EDWYN | 1 | 89.4% | +9.4% |
| ROBERTS, LEZAH | 1 | 48.4% | +35.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18833144 | ANTI-COUNTERFEITING OBJECT, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME, AND USE THEREOF | LABAZE, EDWYN | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18294739 | MUCOADHESIVE OCULAR DELIVERY SYSTEM FOR THE TREATMENT OF GLAUCOMA | ROBERTS, LEZAH | 46d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1612 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18833144 | ANTI-COUNTERFEITING OBJECT, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME, AND USE THEREOF | LABAZE, EDWYN | — | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jul 25, 2024 |
| 18294739 | MUCOADHESIVE OCULAR DELIVERY SYSTEM FOR THE TREATMENT OF GLAUCOMA | ROBERTS, LEZAH | 1612 | §103Other | Final Rejection | 46d | Pending | Feb 02, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial