Technology areas: Communications • Semiconductors, Circuits & Optics
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
AiMi Inc. has 2 pending office actions within the Communications technology area. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, showing a lack of overlap in the current prosecution personnel and departments. KRZYSTAN, ALEXANDER J is the busiest examiner for the company, holding 1 pending office action. Because the 2 pending office actions are split between 2 distinct art units, the company must navigate different departmental guidelines for each matter.
The use of 2 distinct examiners for only 2 pending matters means that each case requires an individualized approach tailored to the specific examiner and art unit assigned. There is no opportunity to leverage examiner familiarity across the active portfolio, as each of the 2 pending office actions is isolated in its own administrative environment. Practitioners should prepare for potentially divergent feedback from the 2 distinct art units involved in the Communications technology area. This distribution requires careful management to ensure that prosecution tactics remain consistent across the 2 distinct examiners.
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 (50%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KRZYSTAN, ALEXANDER J | 1 | 81.3% | +7.3% |
| GILLESPIE, NICOLE KATHLEEN | 1 | 54.5% | +50.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19061634 | Audio Techniques for Music Content Generation | KRZYSTAN, ALEXANDER J | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18585754 | Granular User Feedback Tracking for Generative Music Systems | GILLESPIE, NICOLE KATHLEEN | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 2691 | 1 |
| 2837 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19061634 | Audio Techniques for Music Content Generation | KRZYSTAN, ALEXANDER J | 2691 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 24, 2025 |
| 18585754 | Granular User Feedback Tracking for Generative Music Systems | GILLESPIE, NICOLE KATHLEEN | 2837 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 23, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free TrialAiMi Inc. has 2 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 2 art units and 2 examiners.
Alexander J Krzystan has the most, with 1 of AiMi Inc.'s pending office actions.
Mostly Communications (USPTO Tech Center 2600), based on where its pending office actions are examined.
