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
Lisa Lindberg holds a company patent portfolio in the Chemistry & Materials technology area, currently featuring 1 pending office action. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, showing a centralized prosecution strategy. For a portfolio of this type, the current activity is limited to a single point of interaction within the patent office's Chemistry & Materials division.
The busiest examiner for this portfolio is KHAN, AMINA S, who is overseeing 1 busiest examiner pending action. This single action constitutes the total volume of 1 pending office action for the company. Consequently, the examiner's specific interpretation of the claims will be the decisive factor in the immediate success of the portfolio. The relationship between the examiner and the pending workload simplifies the management of the company's active matters.
The presence of 1 distinct art unit and 1 distinct examiner means there is no variation in the examination environment for this portfolio. While this focus allows for a clear prosecution path for the 1 pending office action, it also means the company is not currently testing its technology across different art units. The strategy is entirely dependent on the resolution of this single active case in the Chemistry & Materials field.
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 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KHAN, AMINA S | 1 | 47.5% | +43.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17796503 | APPLICATION OF FRAGRANCE TO FABRIC SUBSTRATES USING FOAM | KHAN, AMINA S | 93d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1761 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17796503 | APPLICATION OF FRAGRANCE TO FABRIC SUBSTRATES USING FOAM | KHAN, AMINA S | 1761 | §103 | Final Rejection | 93d overdue | Pending | Jul 29, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial