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 • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days
Loughborough University manages a company patent portfolio in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The prosecution data highlights 1 pending office action currently being processed by the USPTO. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C, who is the only examiner listed for the university. The portfolio is situated within a distinct art unit, suggesting a specific technical focus for the university's filings. CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C is the busiest examiner, responsible for the busiest examiner pending action.
Practitioners should recognize that having 1 pending office action in a distinct art unit allows for a highly specialized prosecution strategy. Because the workload is not distributed, the university can tailor its responses to the specific preferences of CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C. This concentration within the Chemistry & Materials sector indicates that the current intellectual property efforts are focused on a specific technical path. The presence of the busiest examiner pending action confirms that the entire prosecution effort is managed by the identified examiner.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C | 1 | 59.6% | +18.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17617666 | PLASMA TREATMENT | CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C | 15d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17617666 | PLASMA TREATMENT | CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C | 15d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1774 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17617666 | PLASMA TREATMENT | CLEVELAND, TIMOTHY C | 1774 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | 15d | Pending | Dec 09, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial