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
Cynagra LLC maintains a patent portfolio within the Chemistry & Materials technology area, characterized by 1 pending office action. This prosecution activity is distributed across 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, reflecting a concentrated effort in a specific technical domain. The presence of only 1 pending office action suggests a targeted filing strategy or a portfolio in its early stages of development.
SMITH, JENNIFER A is identified as the busiest examiner for Cynagra LLC, currently handling 1 busiest examiner pending office action. Because this examiner is the sole individual currently reviewing the portfolio's active cases, their examination style and technical interpretations are the primary factors in the prosecution's progress. This centralization allows for a focused legal strategy but also means the portfolio's immediate success is tied to the discretion of SMITH, JENNIFER A.
In the Chemistry & Materials field, the specific requirements of the 1 distinct art unit can vary significantly. Practitioners should focus on the 1 pending office action as the key priority for the portfolio. By analyzing the history of SMITH, JENNIFER A and the standards of the art unit, the applicant can better anticipate potential challenges and work toward a favorable resolution for their pending claims.
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 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SMITH, JENNIFER A | 1 | 61.0% | +26.6% |
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 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18232297 | METHODS OF FORMING LOW SALT NITROGEN-BASED FERTILIZER | SMITH, JENNIFER A | 22d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1731 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18232297 | METHODS OF FORMING LOW SALT NITROGEN-BASED FERTILIZER | SMITH, JENNIFER A | 1731 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 22d | Pending | Aug 09, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial