Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Essentra Filter Products Development Co. Pte. Ltd. manages a patent portfolio in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. Currently, the company has 1 pending office action. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, VAKILI, DANIEL EDWARD, within 1 distinct art unit. VAKILI, DANIEL EDWARD is the busiest examiner with 1 busiest examiner pending. This means that the company's current prosecution success depends on this 1 distinct examiner. The concentration in 1 distinct art unit indicates a specific technical focus for the pending application.
With only 1 pending office action, the portfolio is in a phase of low-volume activity. Practitioners should be aware that the lack of examiner diversity means there is no internal baseline for comparing examiner behavior. Consequently, the immediate success of the company's patent strategy depends on the interactions with VAKILI, DANIEL EDWARD. Every response to the 1 pending office action must be carefully tailored to the specific examination style of the 1 distinct examiner. This concentration means that the company's immediate patent prospects are shaped by a single individual's interpretation within the 1 distinct art unit. For a portfolio of this scale, the focus is on a single high-priority application.
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 | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| VAKILI, DANIEL EDWARD | 1 | 64.7% | +13.5% |
| BIEGER, VIRGINIA RUTH | 1 | 42.9% | +15.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17801850 | METHOD FOR MAKING A FILTER ELEMENT OR MOUTHPIECE | VAKILI, DANIEL EDWARD | 12d |
| 17779368 | TOBACCO SMOKE FILTER | BIEGER, VIRGINIA RUTH | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1747 | 1 |
| 1755 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17801850 | METHOD FOR MAKING A FILTER ELEMENT OR MOUTHPIECE | VAKILI, DANIEL EDWARD | 1747 | §103 | Final Rejection | 12d | Pending | Aug 24, 2022 |
| 17779368 | TOBACCO SMOKE FILTER | BIEGER, VIRGINIA RUTH | 1755 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | May 24, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial