Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Ecospec Noveltech Pte. Ltd. currently has 2 pending office actions in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These matters are distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. This distribution shows a broader organizational footprint than many portfolios of a similar size. The involvement of 2 distinct art units suggests the applications cover different classifications within the medical device field.
The busiest examiner is WARD, THOMAS JOHN, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. With 2 pending actions spread across 2 distinct art units, the company faces varied examination environments. This diversity in art units may require different tactical approaches for each pending matter. Practitioners should note that the company's current legal activity is not centralized under a single supervisory group or examiner. The presence of 2 distinct examiners for only 2 actions indicates a lack of examiner overlap in the current prosecution cycle. Managing 2 pending office actions across 2 distinct art units requires a coordinated approach to ensure consistency in arguments across different technical groups.
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 |
|---|---|
| §101 + other | 1 (50%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WARD, THOMAS JOHN | 1 | 51.7% | +25.3% |
| SIEFKE, SAMUEL P | 1 | 63.1% | +17.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18090679 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING ANTIOXIDANT CAPACITY IN BEVERAGES | SIEFKE, SAMUEL P | 33d |
| 18038133 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATING LIQUID BEVERAGE USING ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD COMPRISING AC AND DC COMPONENTS | WARD, THOMAS JOHN | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18090679 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING ANTIOXIDANT CAPACITY IN BEVERAGES | SIEFKE, SAMUEL P | 33d |
| 18038133 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATING LIQUID BEVERAGE USING ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD COMPRISING AC AND DC COMPONENTS | WARD, THOMAS JOHN | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3761 | 1 |
| 1758 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18038133 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATING LIQUID BEVERAGE USING ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD COMPRISING AC AND DC COMPONENTS | WARD, THOMAS JOHN | 3761 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | May 22, 2023 |
| 18090679 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING ANTIOXIDANT CAPACITY IN BEVERAGES | SIEFKE, SAMUEL P | 1758 | §101§112 | Non-Final OA | 33d | Pending | Dec 29, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial