JULY 2026 RELEASE · OFFICE ACTION BUILDER
From Office Action to attorney-ready response package
Drop the Office Action into Junior and JR3 takes it from there: it detects the application number, retrieves the entire USPTO file wrapper live, analyzes the rejections, mines what has won with your examiner, and builds a 37 C.F.R. §1.121-compliant response .docx — file wrapper to filed, in one guided build.
Entire file wrapper, retrieved live
Spec, claims, the last response, the OA, the PTO-892, and all cited art — pulled automatically via the Patent Data API. Retrieval never blocks on gaps.
MPEP-compliant persona
The PGW · Office Action Response persona complies with MPEP §700 / §2100 / §600 / §714 and 37 C.F.R. §1.121 from the first step.
Examiner-specific strategy
Examiner Analytics surfaces allowance, interview, and rejection-withdrawal statistics — then mines the traversal arguments that historically won.
Filing-formatted output
A 37 C.F.R. §1.121-compliant Office Action Response .docx — Build Shell or Build Full Draft — saved straight to the project.
File Wrapper Retrieval
The entire file wrapper, retrieved live from the USPTO
No hunting through PAIR or Patent Center. JR3 reads the uploaded CTNF, resolves the application number, and pulls the complete prosecution record via the Patent Data API — in the demo matter, 14 documents including the merged last response and 8 cited references.
- ADS, specification, and claims — as filed and currently on record
- The last filed response (merged), the Office Action, and the PTO-892
- Every §102 / §103 cited reference, collected automatically
- Anything the wrapper can’t return is flagged for manual upload — retrieval never blocks
Documentation · Template Library
Your record, verified — your firm’s templates, attached
Every input is visible and correctable before anything is drafted. Then attach a sample from the Template Library — like a “Standard §103 OAR — Remarks Model” used in 41 responses in this art unit — so the draft is modeled on the firm’s own proven responses, not a generic AI voice.
- Grouped review of everything retrieved: application materials, last response, OA, cited references
- Templates carry firm usage data — pick the shell that has worked in this art unit
- JR3 models the Remarks on the template you choose
- Missing items never block the workflow
OA Analysis
The Office Action, decomposed into structured facts
In seconds, JR3 extracts the bibliographic data, claim disposition, cited-art mapping, and examiner profile from the CTNF — in the demo: claims 1–18 rejected under §103 over Dolby ’911, §101 raised on claims 1–7, statutory period 3 months with the due date computed.
- Rejection grounds and claim status, mapped to the cited art
- OA type, mail date, and statutory due date extracted automatically
- Examiner and art unit identified, feeding Examiner Analytics
- Analysis runs in the background — leave the step and it’s ready when you return
Sift Canvas
The rejection, your prior response, and the cited art — side by side
The core prosecution reading job becomes a conversation. Open the Sift Canvas 3-up view — Office Action, Last Filed Response, cited art — and ask JR3 to walk you through the §103 rejection: all three panes scroll and highlight the exact passages, from the examiner’s Dolby col. 6 position to your prior Alice step 2 argument.
- Three documents in view at once, with 1-up / 2-up / 3-up switching
- Ask about any ground — JR3 navigates every pane to the matching passage and highlights it
- See exactly how the examiner responded to your prior arguments
- Save key excerpts to project notes with one click
Examiner Analytics
Know who you’re arguing to
Examiner Analytics grounds your strategy in data. In the demo matter, the Examiner Data tab shows a 41% allowance rate against a 56% art-unit average, 2.8 OAs to allowance, an 86% interview grant rate — and that this examiner withdraws §101 in 48% of cases after a response. That’s a lever worth pulling, and it’s one click away.
- Allowance rate, OAs to allowance, interview grant, and appeal reversal — examiner vs. art unit
- Rejections by statute: see where this examiner actually fights (§101, §102, §103, §112)
- §101 disposition after response: withdrawn vs. maintained vs. appeal
- One click launches a §101 argument analysis scoped to the art unit
Argument Analysis
Mine the arguments that actually won
Instead of guessing what will persuade the examiner, Argument Analysis parses real prosecution histories — in the demo, 147 §101 arguments across Art Unit 2649 — and extracts the traversals that led to allowance. JR3 spots the pattern: framing the invention as a specific technical improvement (Alice step 2) appears in 4 of the last 5 allowances.
- Filter by statute, examiner, art unit, and notice-of-allowance date
- Every result carries an Allowed / Abandoned outcome badge
- Cherry-pick the winning applications and save them to the workspace
- Compile a citable PDF report — the §101 Argument Report — saved straight into the project
Outline
Every section carries a prompt JR3 obeys
You stay the architect. The outline is seeded from your attached template — Cover, Status of the Claims per 37 C.F.R. §1.121, Amendments, Remarks, Conclusion — and every section carries an editable natural-language instruction JR3 follows at build time. Add an Examiner Interview section, point the §101 prompt at the winning arguments in the §101 Argument Report, and reorder freely.
- “Recommended” mimics your attached template; a system recommendation is one toggle away
- Edit, reorder, or add sections and sub-sections — each with its own prompt
- Close the loop with analytics: tell the §101 section to mirror the report’s winning arguments
- Save as workflow — reuse the whole recipe on the next OA
Build · Project Email
A filing-formatted .docx — then the whole package, handed off
One click turns everything upstream — the record, the template, the tuned outline, the argument analytics — into a properly formatted Office Action Response .docx. Choose Build Shell to stage every section with a placeholder per rejection ground, 37 C.F.R. §1.121 compliant with no merits argued, or Build Full Draft for sourced draft content. Then Project Email hands the entire package to the attorney of record in one send.
- Live section checklist: cover, claim listing, amendments, Remarks per ground, conclusion
- Marked-up claim listing with (Currently Amended) status identifiers and underlined amendments
- Every input file tagged and traceable — sources, templates, and generated reports
- All project files attached automatically, with the statutory due date in the subject line
Build — the response drafted section by section
Project Email — the attorney-ready package, sent
Know your examiner. Reuse what won. Build the response.
One guided build · Initiation → Documentation → OA Analysis → Outline → Build
OA Builder · Available now in Universe
Your next Office Action response starts with a drag-and-drop
See OA Builder run end to end on a live matter — file wrapper retrieval, Examiner Analytics, Sift Canvas, and a filing-formatted response .docx in a single guided build.