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 • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
UNIVERSITE DE NANTES has 1 pending office action in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit. MCNEIL, STEPHANIE A N is the busiest examiner, currently reviewing the pending matter.
The concentration in 1 distinct art unit suggests a focused legal strategy for the university's current pending application. This 1 action is the primary focus of the institution's active prosecution efforts. For a practitioner, the involvement of a single examiner ensures that all communications remain consistent, which is critical for maintaining a unified prosecution record in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals sector.
The centralized review process allows the applicant to focus resources on the specific requirements and examination style of the assigned official. This can lead to a more efficient resolution of technical rejections and a more predictable path toward allowance. By focusing on this 1 pending action, the university can ensure that its technical claims are thoroughly addressed within the specialized framework of the assigned art unit and examiner.
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 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCNEIL, STEPHANIE A N | 1 | 10.9% | +10.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18512545 | Use of a Laminin for Differentiating Pluripotent Cells into Hepatocyte Lineage Cells | MCNEIL, STEPHANIE A N | 15d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18512545 | Use of a Laminin for Differentiating Pluripotent Cells into Hepatocyte Lineage Cells | MCNEIL, STEPHANIE A N | 15d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1653 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18512545 | Use of a Laminin for Differentiating Pluripotent Cells into Hepatocyte Lineage Cells | MCNEIL, STEPHANIE A N | 1653 | §103 | Final Rejection | 15d | Pending | Nov 17, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial