Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals • Chemistry & Materials
6 pending office actions • 4 art units • 6 examiners • 0 of 6 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Insectergy LLC is managing 6 pending office actions within the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals technology area. These actions are distributed across 6 distinct examiners, meaning that every pending matter is being reviewed by a different individual. This level of examiner diversity suggests a broad range of perspectives are being applied to the company's patent applications. The portfolio spans 4 distinct art units, indicating that the company's biotechnology and pharmaceutical innovations are categorized into several different specialized groups.
BOECKELMAN, JACOB A is the busiest examiner, though this individual is only responsible for 1 pending office action. With 6 pending office actions in total and 6 distinct examiners, the workload is distributed so that each examiner handles exactly a single pending action. This distribution minimizes the impact of any single examiner's tendencies on the overall portfolio. Practitioners should prepare for varied examination styles across the 4 distinct art units involved.
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%) |
| §103 only | 1 (17%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 4 (67%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOECKELMAN, JACOB A | 1 | 35.2% | +45.6% |
| FIEBIG, RUSSELL G | 1 | 62.6% | +25.0% |
| STEVENS, MARK V | 1 | 65.5% | +41.6% |
| KOHLER, STEPHANIE A | 1 | 31.9% | +31.1% |
| KERSHAW, KELLY P | 1 | 17.7% | +16.0% |
| CHEONG, CHEOM-GIL | 1 | 64.2% | +52.6% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 5 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18370928 | CANNABIS FARMING SYSTEMS AND METHODS | STEVENS, MARK V | 42d |
| 18669730 | CANNABIS OIL EXTRACTION METHOD | BOECKELMAN, JACOB A | — |
| 18596671 | CANNABIS PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | FIEBIG, RUSSELL G | — |
| 17138004 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | KERSHAW, KELLY P | — |
| 16823313 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | CHEONG, CHEOM-GIL | — |
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 6 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18370928 | CANNABIS FARMING SYSTEMS AND METHODS | STEVENS, MARK V | 42d |
| 18669730 | CANNABIS OIL EXTRACTION METHOD | BOECKELMAN, JACOB A | — |
| 18596671 | CANNABIS PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | FIEBIG, RUSSELL G | — |
| 17987720 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | KOHLER, STEPHANIE A | — |
| 17138004 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | KERSHAW, KELLY P | — |
| 16823313 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | CHEONG, CHEOM-GIL | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1655 | 2 |
| 1791 | 2 |
| 1613 | 1 |
| 1645 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18669730 | CANNABIS OIL EXTRACTION METHOD | BOECKELMAN, JACOB A | 1655 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | May 21, 2024 |
| 18596671 | CANNABIS PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | FIEBIG, RUSSELL G | 1655 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Mar 06, 2024 |
| 18370928 | CANNABIS FARMING SYSTEMS AND METHODS | STEVENS, MARK V | 1613 | §101§102§103§112Other | Final Rejection | 42d | Pending | Sep 21, 2023 |
| 17987720 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | KOHLER, STEPHANIE A | 1791 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Nov 15, 2022 |
| 17138004 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | KERSHAW, KELLY P | 1791 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Dec 30, 2020 |
| 16823313 | INSECT PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | CHEONG, CHEOM-GIL | 1645 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Mar 18, 2020 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial