Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Zip Co. US Inc. has 1 pending office action currently active in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. Prosecution activity is limited to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, suggesting a narrow technical focus for the current portfolio. This concentration allows for a streamlined approach to managing responses within 1 administrative division of the patent office. Practitioners can focus their strategy on the specific tendencies of 1 distinct examiner without the need to reconcile conflicting feedback from different office branches.
The busiest examiner assigned to the portfolio is FELTEN, DANIEL S, who holds 1 busiest examiner pending action. Because the 1 pending office action is the action listed, the company faces a consolidated prosecution environment. The fact that there is 1 distinct examiner means that the outcome of this action will significantly impact the company's immediate patent position. With 1 distinct art unit involved, the technical arguments can be specialized to the standards of that specific group. This lack of complexity in the prosecution roster provides an opportunity for the applicant to engage in a focused dialogue with FELTEN, DANIEL S.
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 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FELTEN, DANIEL S | 1 | 46.4% | +12.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19219575 | USING PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR DETERMINING CREDIT RISK | FELTEN, DANIEL S | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19219575 | USING PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR DETERMINING CREDIT RISK | FELTEN, DANIEL S | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3692 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19219575 | USING PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR DETERMINING CREDIT RISK | FELTEN, DANIEL S | 3692 | §101§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | May 27, 2025 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial