Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Keren Shushan holds a patent portfolio in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The portfolio currently has 1 pending office action, reflecting a specific point of engagement in the prosecution process. This action is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, HORGER, KIM S., who is the only examiner currently reviewing the company's applications.
The prosecution activity is limited to 1 distinct art unit. This suggests that the subject matter of the pending application is specialized within the broader chemistry field. HORGER, KIM S. is the busiest examiner for this portfolio, with 1 pending office action under their review. The progress of the portfolio is currently tied to the findings of this single examiner.
The fact that 1 pending office action is the total for the portfolio means that the busiest examiner's workload represents the entirety of the active prosecution. This concentration simplifies the monitoring process for the applicant. Practitioners can dedicate their resources to understanding the specific examination style of HORGER, KIM S., as there are no other active matters to balance. This focused approach within 1 distinct art unit provides a clear path for managing the current intellectual property assets.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HORGER, KIM S. | 1 | 70.7% | +20.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18838016 | FABRICATION OF GRAPHENE-BASED ELECTRODES WITH ULTRA-SHORT CHANNEL | HORGER, KIM 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 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18838016 | FABRICATION OF GRAPHENE-BASED ELECTRODES WITH ULTRA-SHORT CHANNEL | HORGER, KIM S. | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1784 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18838016 | FABRICATION OF GRAPHENE-BASED ELECTRODES WITH ULTRA-SHORT CHANNEL | HORGER, KIM S. | 1784 | §102§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Aug 13, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial