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 • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days
Saft America manages a company patent portfolio in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The portfolio currently has 2 pending office actions. These actions are assigned to 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. WILLS, MONIQUE M is the busiest examiner with 1 busiest examiner pending action. This means that each of the 2 pending office actions is being handled by a different examiner in a different art unit.
Practitioners must prepare for 2 distinct prosecution environments, each with its own examiner and art unit standards. The presence of 2 distinct examiners across 2 art units indicates that the portfolio's current filings are technically diverse within the Chemistry & Materials field. Because the 2 pending office actions are split, there is no concentration of workload that would allow for a unified prosecution strategy. Instead, each matter must be addressed according to the specific tendencies of the assigned examiner. The 2 examiners for 2 pending actions suggests that the portfolio is currently facing individualized challenges across different technical sub-sectors.
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 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WILLS, MONIQUE M | 1 | 85.8% | -30.6% |
| CHOI, EVERETT TIMOTHY | 1 | 10.0% | -13.3% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18171799 | ELECTROLYTE ADDITIVE FOR PHOSPHATE CATHODE | WILLS, MONIQUE M | 30d overdue |
| 17876934 | METHOD FOR IN-SITU THERMAL POLYMERIZATION OF A GEL POLYMER ELECTROLYTE IN A LITHIUM-ION ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL | CHOI, EVERETT TIMOTHY | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1723 | 1 |
| 1751 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18171799 | ELECTROLYTE ADDITIVE FOR PHOSPHATE CATHODE | WILLS, MONIQUE M | 1723 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | 30d overdue | Pending | Feb 21, 2023 |
| 17876934 | METHOD FOR IN-SITU THERMAL POLYMERIZATION OF A GEL POLYMER ELECTROLYTE IN A LITHIUM-ION ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL | CHOI, EVERETT TIMOTHY | 1751 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | 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