Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Akihiro Nishioka currently has 1 pending office action within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. This action is situated within a distinct art unit, representing a focused area of intellectual property development. The prosecution is being handled by a distinct examiner, which simplifies the communication channel for this portfolio. JOSEPH W DRODGE is the busiest examiner for the applicant, responsible for the pending office action.
For a practitioner, the presence of the 1 pending office action in the distinct art unit means that the prosecution strategy is currently concentrated on a focused front. This activity in Chemistry & Materials requires a precise response to the specific concerns raised by JOSEPH W DRODGE. The lack of multiple pending actions suggests that the current priority is the resolution of this matter. Navigating the requirements of the distinct art unit allows the applicant to focus their technical arguments. Because a distinct examiner is involved, the applicant can tailor their approach specifically to the style of JOSEPH W DRODGE. This streamlined prosecution environment minimizes the complexity often found in larger portfolios within the Chemistry & Materials field. The 1 pending office action represents the total current workload.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 1 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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRODGE, JOSEPH W | 1 | 78.2% | +38.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18837411 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER, GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER, GELATINIZED BUCKWHEAT DRY POWDER, AND DEVICE FOR PRODUCING GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER | DRODGE, JOSEPH W | 27d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18837411 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER, GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER, GELATINIZED BUCKWHEAT DRY POWDER, AND DEVICE FOR PRODUCING GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER | DRODGE, JOSEPH W | 27d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1773 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18837411 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER, GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER, GELATINIZED BUCKWHEAT DRY POWDER, AND DEVICE FOR PRODUCING GELATINIZED STARCH DRY POWDER | DRODGE, JOSEPH W | 1773 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 27d | Pending | Aug 09, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial