Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
3 pending office actions • 3 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Jemmtec Limited maintains a patent portfolio in the Chemistry & Materials technology area with 3 pending office actions. These actions are distributed across 3 distinct examiners, showing that the company is engaging with multiple reviewers simultaneously. Furthermore, the portfolio spans 3 distinct art units. This distribution indicates that the company's technical applications are diverse enough to be classified into different specialized divisions within the USPTO. Practitioners can see that the company's current workload is spread across multiple administrative channels.
The busiest examiner for Jemmtec Limited is FIGG, TRAVIS M, who is managing 1 pending office action. Since there are 3 pending office actions in total, each of the 3 distinct examiners is responsible for exactly one case. This 1 to 1 ratio between actions and examiners, along with the 3 distinct art units, suggests a varied prosecution landscape. Practitioners should be prepared to manage three different examiner styles and three sets of art unit guidelines as they move these applications forward. The data reflects a portfolio that is not dependent on any single examiner for its overall success.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 | 1 (33%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FIGG, TRAVIS M | 1 | 61.6% | +17.2% |
| CHU, YONG LIANG | 1 | 74.9% | +3.1% |
| BEHRENS JR., ANDRES E | 1 | 52.9% | +18.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18033921 | CATALYST SUPPORT | CHU, YONG LIANG | 10d overdue |
| 18265017 | PACKING MEMBER | FIGG, TRAVIS M | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17778190 | MOULD FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF CERAMIC PACKING MEMBERS | BEHRENS JR., ANDRES E | 15d overdue |
| 18265017 | PACKING MEMBER | FIGG, TRAVIS M | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1783 | 1 |
| 1731 | 1 |
| 1741 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18265017 | PACKING MEMBER | FIGG, TRAVIS M | 1783 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jun 02, 2023 |
| 18033921 | CATALYST SUPPORT | CHU, YONG LIANG | 1731 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 10d overdue | Pending | Apr 26, 2023 |
| 17778190 | MOULD FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF CERAMIC PACKING MEMBERS | BEHRENS JR., ANDRES E | 1741 | §103 | Final Rejection | 15d overdue | Pending | May 19, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial