Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Networking & Security • Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days
Yohana LLC maintains 2 pending office actions across its patent portfolio, which is situated within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. The prosecution work is distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. This distribution suggests that each pending application is facing a unique set of examiner perspectives and art unit standards. The presence of multiple art units within a small portfolio indicates that the company's Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems filings cover diverse technical sub-fields.
HO, THOMAS Y is identified as the busiest examiner for the portfolio, currently overseeing 1 pending office action. The workload is split among the 2 distinct examiners involved. For practitioners, this indicates that prosecution strategy must be tailored to individual examiner preferences rather than a centralized group, as each of the 2 distinct art units likely applies different procedural nuances to the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems filings. Managing these 2 pending office actions requires an approach that addresses the specific requirements of each distinct art unit.
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 | 1 (50%) |
| §103 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HO, THOMAS Y | 1 | 16.9% | +30.1% |
| ALMEIDA, DEVIN E | 1 | 71.5% | +11.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18807604 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TASK DETERMINATION, DELEGATION, AND AUTOMATION | HO, THOMAS Y | 34d |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18330786 | Communication interface for identification of service providers | ALMEIDA, DEVIN E | 28d |
| 18807604 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TASK DETERMINATION, DELEGATION, AND AUTOMATION | HO, THOMAS Y | 34d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3624 | 1 |
| 2492 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18807604 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TASK DETERMINATION, DELEGATION, AND AUTOMATION | HO, THOMAS Y | 3624 | §101§102§103 | Non-Final OA | 34d | Pending | Aug 16, 2024 |
| 18330786 | Communication interface for identification of service providers | ALMEIDA, DEVIN E | 2492 | §103 | Final Rejection | 28d | Pending | Jun 07, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial