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
Daniel M Cohen has 1 pending office action in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. This prosecution is handled by 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit. Such a concentrated profile suggests that the current patenting activity is focused on a specific chemical or material innovation. By operating within 1 distinct art unit, the applicant is interacting with a single specialized group of examiners who focus on this particular area of chemistry.
IMANI, ELIZABETH MARY COLE is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, managing the 1 pending office action. The current activity for this portfolio is concentrated under a single examiner within the USPTO, with no other staff members reviewing pending applications. Since the busiest examiner is only managing 1 pending office action, the portfolio is currently in a low-volume state. This allows for a very direct and focused prosecution effort, though it also means the immediate patent prospects are dependent on the review of this examiner.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| IMANI, ELIZABETH MARY COLE | 1 | 33.5% | +25.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18691919 | FORMATION OF THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE REBAR | IMANI, ELIZABETH MARY COLE | 35d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1789 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18691919 | FORMATION OF THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE REBAR | IMANI, ELIZABETH MARY COLE | 1789 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 35d | Pending | Mar 14, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial