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
Bond-Laminates GmbH has 1 pending office action in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. This action is being reviewed by 1 distinct examiner, KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J, in 1 distinct art unit. KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J is the busiest examiner with 1 pending action. With only 1 pending action, the company's current prosecution is entirely focused on this single examiner's review. This concentration ensures that the technical narrative remains consistent, as it is only being evaluated by one person within one art unit.
The Chemistry & Materials technology area provides the context for this single pending matter. Because there is only 1 distinct examiner, KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J, the applicant does not have to manage multiple examiner styles or conflicting art unit requirements. The fact that KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J is the busiest examiner with 1 pending action highlights the focused nature of the current portfolio. Practitioners should focus on addressing the specific concerns of this examiner to move the 1 pending office action toward allowance. In such a concentrated portfolio, the relationship with the 1 distinct examiner is the primary driver of prosecution success within the 1 distinct 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 |
|---|---|
| §101 + other | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J | 1 | 71.2% | +17.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18870260 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING COMPOSITE FIBER MATERIALS WITH A PARTICULARLY LOW DEGREE OF FIBER WARPAGE | KENNEDY, TIMOTHY 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18870260 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING COMPOSITE FIBER MATERIALS WITH A PARTICULARLY LOW DEGREE OF FIBER WARPAGE | KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1743 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18870260 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING COMPOSITE FIBER MATERIALS WITH A PARTICULARLY LOW DEGREE OF FIBER WARPAGE | KENNEDY, TIMOTHY J | 1743 | §101§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 27, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial