Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Isse Safety S L currently manages 1 pending office action within the Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems technology area. This single active matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and is being processed within 1 distinct art unit. This indicates a very concentrated prosecution effort, where the company's current patent goals are focused on a specific technical classification and a single point of review at the patent office.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is KOTTER, KIP T, who is responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending office action. Because this examiner handles the only 1 pending office action for the company, the prosecution strategy must be highly tailored to this individual's specific requirements and the standards of the 1 distinct art unit involved. Practitioners should prioritize understanding the examiner's past actions and preferences, as there are no other active cases in the portfolio to provide broader context or alternative routes to allowance.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KOTTER, KIP T | 1 | 67.9% | +21.4% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18593907 | VEHICLE WHEEL COVER CASING AND A METHOD OF MANUFACTURING A VEHICLE WHEEL COVER CASING | KOTTER, KIP T | 23d overdue |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18593907 | VEHICLE WHEEL COVER CASING AND A METHOD OF MANUFACTURING A VEHICLE WHEEL COVER CASING | KOTTER, KIP T | 23d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3615 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18593907 | VEHICLE WHEEL COVER CASING AND A METHOD OF MANUFACTURING A VEHICLE WHEEL COVER CASING | KOTTER, KIP T | 3615 | §102§103§112 | Final Rejection | 23d overdue | Pending | Mar 02, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial