Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
1 pending office actions • 0 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Advanced Potash Technologies Ltd. holds a company patent portfolio that currently features 1 pending office action. This action is assigned to LANGEL, WAYNE A, who is the busiest examiner for the company. Because LANGEL, WAYNE A is responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending action, the company's current prosecution activity is centered on this 1 examiner's review. This concentration allows the company to focus its resources on a single set of examiner communications and requirements.
The data shows that the portfolio involves 1 distinct examiner and 0 distinct art units. The figure of 0 distinct art units suggests that the 1 pending office action may be in a unique classification or a transitional phase within the patent office. Despite this, the involvement of 1 distinct examiner provides a clear and consistent path for the company's current legal efforts. For patent practitioners, this means there is no need to navigate the complexities of multiple art units or diverse examiner behaviors. The reliance on 1 distinct examiner for the 1 pending office action creates a focused prosecution environment. This simplicity can be an advantage in maintaining a clear and consistent narrative during the patent application process, as all current efforts are directed through 1 examiner.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| LANGEL, WAYNE A | 1 | 78.4% | +23.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18567230 | MULTI-STEP METHODS OF MAKING A MULTI-PHASE MATERIAL | LANGEL, WAYNE A | — |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18567230 | MULTI-STEP METHODS OF MAKING A MULTI-PHASE MATERIAL | LANGEL, WAYNE A | — | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Dec 05, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial