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
Plant Heads has 1 pending office action in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. Current prosecution activity for the company involves 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, suggesting a streamlined and focused approach to its patent filings. This level of concentration is typical for portfolios targeting specific chemical compositions or material science innovations within a single regulatory framework rather than a broad technological field.
KERSHAW, KELLY P is the busiest examiner with 1 busiest examiner pending action. This 1 pending office action represents the full extent of the company's current interactions with the patent office. By operating within 1 distinct art unit and under a single examiner, the company can focus its legal efforts on addressing the specific requirements of that unit's examination standards. This centralized prosecution structure minimizes the risk of conflicting arguments across different applications, ensuring a cohesive narrative for the company's materials science innovations.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KERSHAW, KELLY P | 1 | 17.7% | +16.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18682844 | COMPOSITIONS FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION | KERSHAW, KELLY P | 14d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18682844 | COMPOSITIONS FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION | KERSHAW, KELLY P | 14d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1791 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18682844 | COMPOSITIONS FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION | KERSHAW, KELLY P | 1791 | §102§103§112 | Final Rejection | 14d | Pending | Feb 09, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial