Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
UNIVERSITE DE ROUEN NORMANDIE currently maintains a company patent portfolio with 1 pending office action. This matter is situated within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. The prosecution is handled by 1 distinct examiner working within 1 distinct art unit. This indicates a focused point of contact for the company's current active intellectual property matters.
MARTINEZ, TARA L is the busiest examiner among the 1 distinct examiners for this portfolio, as she is responsible for the 1 pending office action currently on record. Because there is only 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit involved, the prosecution environment is centralized. Practitioners can dedicate their resources to understanding the specific preferences and historical trends associated with MARTINEZ, TARA L and her particular art unit.
The outcome of this 1 pending office action will define the immediate success of the portfolio in this technology area. The absence of additional examiners or art units simplifies the strategic requirements for this portfolio. This profile allows for a targeted approach to the active matter, ensuring that all efforts are aligned with the requirements of the single examiner and art unit involved.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| VAJDA, KRISTIN ANN | 1 | 84.0% | +10.9% |
| FLORES, ADRIAN | 1 | 100.0% | +0.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18687496 | USE OF BRANCHED CHAIN FATTY ACIDS (BCFAS) FOR THE TREATMENT OF INTESTINAL INFLAMMATION | VAJDA, KRISTIN ANN | — |
| 18683083 | USE OF EZH2 INHIBITORS FOR THE TREATMENT OF AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS | FLORES, ADRIAN | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18687496 | USE OF BRANCHED CHAIN FATTY ACIDS (BCFAS) FOR THE TREATMENT OF INTESTINAL INFLAMMATION | VAJDA, KRISTIN ANN | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1622 | 1 |
| 3774 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18687496 | USE OF BRANCHED CHAIN FATTY ACIDS (BCFAS) FOR THE TREATMENT OF INTESTINAL INFLAMMATION | VAJDA, KRISTIN ANN | 1622 | §102§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 28, 2024 |
| 18683083 | USE OF EZH2 INHIBITORS FOR THE TREATMENT OF AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS | FLORES, ADRIAN | 3774 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 12, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial