Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
5 pending office actions • 4 clients • 5 examiners • 4 art units • 0 of 5 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 11 patents granted in the last 365 days
PAUL AND PAUL is a patent law firm specializing in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. The firm has an history of managing 1233 career applications. This volume of filings indicates familiarity with the procedural requirements of the patent office. Currently, the firm is handling 4 pending office actions, representing its current active prosecution matters.
The firm maintains a resolved allowance rate of 86.22 percent. This rate reflects a track record of successfully obtaining patent grants for its applicants. On average, the firm requires 3.39 office actions per allowance. This figure suggests that the firm typically engages in multiple rounds of communication and amendment with examiners before reaching an allowance.
For practitioners, these data points highlight a firm with a long-standing practice that delivers successful outcomes through a thorough prosecution strategy in the medical devices and mechanical engineering sectors. The 1233 career applications and 4 pending office actions provide a snapshot of the firm's historical and immediate involvement in patent prosecution. These data points are useful for estimating the resources and time necessary for securing intellectual property through this firm.
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 (20%) |
| §103 only | 1 (20%) |
| §102 only | 1 (20%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (20%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (20%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HUYNH, KHOA D | 1 | 18.0% | +20.6% |
| MORAN, KATHERINE M | 1 | 54.3% | +24.2% |
| ROHRHOFF, DANIEL J | 1 | 77.8% | +15.0% |
| GONZALEZ, MADELINE | 1 | 72.5% | +15.9% |
| BALDRIGHI, ERIC C | 1 | 42.0% | +40.9% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19320708 | LEG PROTECTOR | HUYNH, KHOA D | 70d |
| 18991102 | Protective Sports And Safety Equipment And Foam Used With The Protective Equipment | MORAN, KATHERINE M | — |
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 5 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17994210 | CAPTIVE CLOSURE WITH STABILISED OPENING ANGLE | BALDRIGHI, ERIC C | 26d |
| 19320708 | LEG PROTECTOR | HUYNH, KHOA D | 70d |
| 18991102 | Protective Sports And Safety Equipment And Foam Used With The Protective Equipment | MORAN, KATHERINE M | — |
| 18982089 | TELESCOPIC RAIL | ROHRHOFF, DANIEL J | — |
| 18899106 | PROCESS FOR CONTROLLING CYANOBACTERIA | GONZALEZ, MADELINE | — |
| Client (Assignee) | Pending OAs |
|---|---|
| Force3 Pro Gear | 2 |
| Accuride International GmbH | 1 |
| Biosafe Systems LLC | 1 |
| BERICAP Holding GmbH | 1 |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3732 | 2 |
| 3637 | 1 |
| 1773 | 1 |
| 3733 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Client | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19320708 | LEG PROTECTOR | Force3 Pro Gear | HUYNH, KHOA D | 3732 | §101§102§103 | Non-Final OA | 70d | Pending | Sep 05, 2025 |
| 18991102 | Protective Sports And Safety Equipment And Foam Used With The Protective Equipment | Force3 Pro Gear | MORAN, KATHERINE M | 3732 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Dec 20, 2024 |
| 18982089 | TELESCOPIC RAIL | Accuride International GmbH | ROHRHOFF, DANIEL J | 3637 | §103DP | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Dec 16, 2024 |
| 18899106 | PROCESS FOR CONTROLLING CYANOBACTERIA | Biosafe Systems LLC | GONZALEZ, MADELINE | 1773 | §102 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 27, 2024 |
| 17994210 | CAPTIVE CLOSURE WITH STABILISED OPENING ANGLE | BERICAP Holding GmbH | BALDRIGHI, ERIC C | 3733 | §103 | Final Rejection | 26d | Pending | Nov 25, 2022 |
IP Author helps law firms respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial86.2% of resolved applications prosecuted by Paul And Paul were allowed, across 1,233 applications in USPTO records.
3.39 office actions per allowed application on average.
5 pending office actions as of October 2026, for 4 clients, before 5 examiners in 4 art units.