Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Nippn Corporation currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These actions are being reviewed by 2 distinct examiners, both of whom are located within 1 distinct art unit. This indicates that while the workload is spread across multiple individuals, the technical focus remains concentrated within a single examination group. LACHICA, ERICSON M is identified as the busiest examiner, holding 1 pending office action.
Because each of the examiners holds the same amount of work, the workload is evenly distributed across the assigned staff. Practitioners should note the examiner-to-art-unit ratio, which may lead to different interpretations of similar technology within the same group. The presence of 2 pending actions suggests an active prosecution phase. Navigating different examiners within the assigned art unit requires a strategy that accounts for the specific preferences of each individual while maintaining consistency across the Chemistry & Materials filings. This structure allows for a focused technical review while benefiting from the perspectives of multiple examiners within a single technical group. The alignment of examiners ensures that each application receives a specialized review tailored to its specific technical niche.
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 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| LACHICA, ERICSON M | 1 | 30.0% | +35.4% |
| CHAWLA, JYOTI | 1 | 52.7% | +30.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18865401 | PRODUCTION METHOD OF PROCESSED SOY MILK FOOD | LACHICA, ERICSON 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18865401 | PRODUCTION METHOD OF PROCESSED SOY MILK FOOD | LACHICA, ERICSON M | — |
| 18687596 | MEAT QUALITY IMPROVER | CHAWLA, JYOTI | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1791 | 2 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18865401 | PRODUCTION METHOD OF PROCESSED SOY MILK FOOD | LACHICA, ERICSON M | 1791 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Nov 13, 2024 |
| 18687596 | MEAT QUALITY IMPROVER | CHAWLA, JYOTI | 1791 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 28, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial