Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Cfs Materials LLC currently has 2 pending office actions within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. These cases are split between a pair of distinct examiners, meaning each active matter is being handled by a different individual. Despite this examiner diversity, all activity is concentrated within 1 distinct art unit. This suggests that while the examiners are different individuals, they likely work within the same administrative group and follow similar technical guidelines.
MAESTRI, PATRICK J is the busiest examiner for the company, with 1 pending office action under their review. Since there are multiple distinct examiners in total, this individual shares the workload equally with another official, each handling a single case. The presence of 1 distinct art unit implies a consistent technical focus for both cases. For the practitioner, this requires managing two different examiner styles while maintaining a unified technical argument within a single department. The 2 pending office actions represent the company's current active engagement in the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems sector.
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 |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 1 (50%) |
| §112 only | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MAESTRI, PATRICK J | 1 | 73.4% | +14.9% |
| ADAMOS, THEODORE V | 1 | 55.4% | +44.6% |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18679804 | WALL REINFORCEMENT SYSTEMS | MAESTRI, PATRICK J | 30d overdue |
| 17670950 | Wall Reinforcement Systems | ADAMOS, THEODORE V | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3635 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18679804 | WALL REINFORCEMENT SYSTEMS | MAESTRI, PATRICK J | 3635 | §112 | Final Rejection | 30d overdue | Pending | May 31, 2024 |
| 17670950 | Wall Reinforcement Systems | ADAMOS, THEODORE V | 3635 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 14, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial