Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Communications • Semiconductors, Circuits & Optics
6 pending office actions • 2 art units • 4 examiners • 0 of 6 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 27 patents granted in the last 365 days
Envisics Ltd. currently manages 6 pending office actions within the Semiconductors, Circuits & Optics technology area. These matters are distributed across 2 distinct art units, which indicates the technical focus of the portfolio's active prosecution. The workload involves 4 distinct examiners, providing different examination perspectives across the technical groups. Practitioners should note that these filings are the primary focus of current efforts and require specific technical arguments.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA, who is responsible for 2 of the pending office actions. This concentration means that a portion of the 6 pending office actions are handled by an individual examiner. Practitioners should monitor this specific examiner's trends as they represent a part of the current workload. Having 4 distinct examiners suggests that multiple individuals are working within the same art units in the Semiconductors, Circuits & Optics area. This overlap may lead to different outcomes for similar technologies within the portfolio.
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 (17%) |
| §102 only | 1 (17%) |
| §112 only | 1 (17%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 3 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | 2 | 61.5% | +31.9% |
| CHAPEL, DEREK S | 2 | 70.3% | +21.9% |
| GAGNON, GRANT A | 1 | 82.8% | +7.8% |
| LEIBY, CHRISTOPHER E | 1 | 61.9% | +22.2% |
Cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate of 80%+ where the difficulty is Easy or Medium. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18949017 | Light Control Device | GAGNON, GRANT A | — |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 4 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18702260 | HEAD-UP DISPLAY CALIBRATION | LEIBY, CHRISTOPHER E | 31d overdue |
| 18885141 | Head-Up Display | SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | — |
| 18426093 | Driver for a Display Device | SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | — |
| 18240645 | OPTIMISED HOLOGRAM UPDATING | CHAPEL, DEREK S | — |
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 5 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18702260 | HEAD-UP DISPLAY CALIBRATION | LEIBY, CHRISTOPHER E | 31d overdue |
| 18885141 | Head-Up Display | SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | — |
| 18426093 | Driver for a Display Device | SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | — |
| 18474994 | HOLOGRAM CALCULATION FOR COMPACT HEAD-UP DISPLAY | CHAPEL, DEREK S | — |
| 18240645 | OPTIMISED HOLOGRAM UPDATING | CHAPEL, DEREK S | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 2872 | 3 |
| 2621 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18949017 | Light Control Device | GAGNON, GRANT A | — | §102 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 15, 2024 |
| 18885141 | Head-Up Display | SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | — | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 13, 2024 |
| 18702260 | HEAD-UP DISPLAY CALIBRATION | LEIBY, CHRISTOPHER E | 2621 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 31d overdue | Pending | Apr 17, 2024 |
| 18426093 | Driver for a Display Device | SRIDHAR, SAMANVITHA | 2872 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jan 29, 2024 |
| 18474994 | HOLOGRAM CALCULATION FOR COMPACT HEAD-UP DISPLAY | CHAPEL, DEREK S | 2872 | §112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 26, 2023 |
| 18240645 | OPTIMISED HOLOGRAM UPDATING | CHAPEL, DEREK S | 2872 | §101§102DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Aug 31, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial