Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
3 pending office actions • 1 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
BATAVIA B.V. is currently addressing 3 pending office actions in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These actions are spread across 3 distinct examiners, yet they all fall within 1 distinct art unit. This structure suggests that while the technical focus is narrow, the company must manage different examiner perspectives. SHIRSAT, VIVEK K is the busiest examiner with 1 pending action. Because all 3 pending office actions are concentrated in 1 distinct art unit, the company's success depends on navigating the specific standards of a single technical group.
Practitioners should prepare for a consistent technical environment but varied individual examiner preferences. The involvement of 3 distinct examiners for only 3 actions means that no single examiner has a dominant influence over the portfolio. However, the shared art unit suggests that the underlying technical precedents will be similar across all pending matters. SHIRSAT, VIVEK K represents one of the three points of contact at the USPTO for this applicant. This distribution of workload requires a strategy that balances individual examiner styles with the unified requirements of the art unit.
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 (33%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (67%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SHIRSAT, VIVEK K | 1 | 74.1% | +28.1% |
| SOTO, CHRISTOPHER ASHLEY | 1 | 52.7% | +27.2% |
| LEE JR, WOODY A | 1 | 84.6% | +12.9% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18629531 | CLEANING DISC AND ELECTRIC CLEANING APPLIANCE INSTALLED WITH THE SAME | SOTO, CHRISTOPHER ASHLEY | — |
| 18402056 | WEED BURNER | LEE JR, WOODY A | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18851581 | WEED BURNER | SHIRSAT, VIVEK K | — |
| 18629531 | CLEANING DISC AND ELECTRIC CLEANING APPLIANCE INSTALLED WITH THE SAME | SOTO, CHRISTOPHER ASHLEY | — |
| 18402056 | WEED BURNER | LEE JR, WOODY A | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1786 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18851581 | WEED BURNER | SHIRSAT, VIVEK K | — | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 26, 2024 |
| 18629531 | CLEANING DISC AND ELECTRIC CLEANING APPLIANCE INSTALLED WITH THE SAME | SOTO, CHRISTOPHER ASHLEY | 1786 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Apr 08, 2024 |
| 18402056 | WEED BURNER | LEE JR, WOODY A | — | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jan 02, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial