12
Team Members
47
Active Tasks
156
Matters Assigned
8
Online Now
Team Members
JS
John Smith
Senior Patent Attorney
Online
42
Matters
8
Tasks
MW
Maria Williams
Patent Attorney
Online
38
Matters
12
Tasks
RB
Robert Brown
Patent Attorney
Busy
35
Matters
6
Tasks
SD
Sarah Davis
Associate Attorney
Online
28
Matters
9
Tasks
KL
Kevin Lee
Associate Attorney
Online
22
Matters
7
Tasks
EJ
Emily Johnson
Patent Agent
Offline
18
Matters
4
Tasks
MT
Michael Taylor
Patent Analyst
Online
-
Matters
15
Tasks
LM
Lisa Martinez
Paralegal
Online
-
Matters
11
Tasks
Workload Distribution
Recent Activity
John Smith completed response for US 17/456,789
10 minutes agoMaria Williams commented on PCT/US2024/012345
25 minutes agoRobert Brown marked task as complete
1 hour agoSarah Davis uploaded claims_v3.docx
2 hours agoKevin Lee was assigned to US 18/234,567
3 hours agoTo Do
8
Review prior art search results
High
JS
Draft claim amendments
High
MW
Prepare IDS filing
Med
LM
In Progress
12
Drafting Office Action response
High
RB
MT
Technical review of specification
Med
SD
Review
6
Final review - Patent application
High
JS
MW
Client approval pending
Low
KL
Done
21
Filed PCT application
Med
EJ
Maintenance fee payment
Low
LM
Team Chat - General
Notifications
Deadline Alert: Response due for US 17/456,789
2 days remainingMaria Williams mentioned you in a comment
1 hour agoTask completed: Prior art search for EP 24123456
2 hours agoYou were assigned to US 18/234,567
3 hours agoReminder: Weekly team meeting in 30 minutes
30 minutes agoMatter Discussion - US 17/456,789
JS
John Smith
Yesterday at 4:30 PM
I've reviewed the office action and identified three main rejection points. The examiner is citing Smith et al. (US 10,123,456) for claims 1-5 and Johnson (WO 2022/123456) for claims 6-10. We need to differentiate our method's unique preprocessing step.
MW
Today at 9:15 AM
Good analysis @John. I found some supporting documentation from the inventors that shows our preprocessing achieves 40% better accuracy. Should we include this as a declaration?
RB
Today at 10:45 AM
That's a great idea. A Rule 132 declaration with experimental data could be very persuasive. I'll draft the declaration template today.
Recent Files
OA_Response_Draft_v3.docx
Prior_Art_Search_Report.pdf
Claims_Matrix.xlsx
Specification_Final.docx
Office_Action_12152024.pdf
Document Library
Templates
Patent_Application_Template.docx
OA_Response_Template.docx
Claims_Chart_Template.xlsx
Client Materials
Reference Materials
Training Documents
Version History - OA_Response_Draft.docx
| Version | Modified By | Date | Changes | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v3 (Current) | John Smith | Dec 13, 2024 2:30 PM | Updated claim amendments based on team review | |
| v2 | Maria Williams | Dec 12, 2024 4:15 PM | Added prior art analysis section | |
| v1 | John Smith | Dec 11, 2024 10:00 AM | Initial draft |