Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Nilo Limited is managing 2 pending office actions within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These 2 actions are distributed across 2 distinct art units and are being reviewed by 2 distinct examiners. TAE H YOON is the busiest examiner with 1 pending office action. This means that each of the company's 2 pending office actions is being handled by a different official in a different technical group.
The presence of 2 distinct art units for only 2 pending office actions indicates a fragmented technical focus. Because there are 2 distinct examiners, the company cannot apply a uniform strategy across its Chemistry & Materials applications. TAE H YOON's involvement in 1 pending office action is mirrored by another examiner's involvement in the second action. This structure requires the company to navigate two separate sets of examiner preferences and art unit standards for its 2 pending office actions. The company must manage two independent prosecution tracks to secure its intellectual property.
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 |
|---|---|
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (50%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (50%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| YOON, TAE H | 1 | 66.5% | +24.7% |
| GRAHAM, ANDREW D | 1 | 59.7% | +22.8% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17784037 | A PLASTIC COMPOSITE PRODUCT | GRAHAM, ANDREW D | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19632518 | BINDER COMPOSITIONS AND USE THEREOF | YOON, TAE H | — |
| 17784037 | A PLASTIC COMPOSITE PRODUCT | GRAHAM, ANDREW D | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1762 | 1 |
| 1742 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19632518 | BINDER COMPOSITIONS AND USE THEREOF | YOON, TAE H | 1762 | §112DP | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Mar 30, 2026 |
| 17784037 | A PLASTIC COMPOSITE PRODUCT | GRAHAM, ANDREW D | 1742 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jun 09, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial