Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Semiconductors, Circuits & Optics
3 pending office actions • 2 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 11 patents granted in the last 365 days
Azur Space Solar Power GmbH holds a company patent portfolio with 3 pending office actions. These actions are situated within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The portfolio involves 2 distinct art units and 3 distinct examiners.
The busiest examiner, CANNON, RYAN SMITH, is currently managing 1 pending office action. Since the busiest examiner only has 1 pending office action, it follows that all 3 pending office actions are distributed among 3 different distinct examiners. This indicates that every active matter for the company is being reviewed by a unique individual.
For practitioners, the involvement of 3 distinct examiners across 3 pending office actions means that no two cases share the same examiner. The 2 distinct art units involved suggest that the Chemistry & Materials technology being patented is spread across different technical groups. Managing these 3 pending office actions requires a separate strategy for each application, as there is no examiner-level overlap to leverage across the current portfolio.
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) | 3 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CANNON, RYAN SMITH | 1 | 55.7% | +36.9% |
| BAUMAN, SCOTT E | 1 | 47.1% | +27.1% |
| TRINH, THANH TRUC | 1 | 22.1% | +10.8% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15390170 | STACK-LIKE MULTI-JUNCTION SOLAR CELL | TRINH, THANH TRUC | 34d |
| 19398811 | III-V PHOTOVOLTAIC MULTI-JUNCTION SOLAR CELL | CANNON, RYAN SMITH | — |
| 17007711 | METALLIZATION METHOD FOR A SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER | BAUMAN, SCOTT E | — |
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 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15390170 | STACK-LIKE MULTI-JUNCTION SOLAR CELL | TRINH, THANH TRUC | 34d |
| 19398811 | III-V PHOTOVOLTAIC MULTI-JUNCTION SOLAR CELL | CANNON, RYAN SMITH | — |
| 17007711 | METALLIZATION METHOD FOR A SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER | BAUMAN, SCOTT E | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1726 | 2 |
| 2815 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19398811 | III-V PHOTOVOLTAIC MULTI-JUNCTION SOLAR CELL | CANNON, RYAN SMITH | 1726 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 24, 2025 |
| 17007711 | METALLIZATION METHOD FOR A SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER | BAUMAN, SCOTT E | 2815 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Aug 31, 2020 |
| 15390170 | STACK-LIKE MULTI-JUNCTION SOLAR CELL | TRINH, THANH TRUC | 1726 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | 34d | Pending | Dec 23, 2016 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial