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
Seaborough Ip I B V has 2 pending office actions within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These actions are handled by 2 distinct examiners but are concentrated within a single distinct art unit. This indicates that while different individuals are reviewing the applications, the technical focus remains within a single specialized group. The presence of multiple examiners within one art unit suggests a consistent technical environment for these filings.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is GROOMS, NOA WILLIAM FRAN, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. This accounts for a portion of the 2 pending office actions in the total portfolio. Practitioners should note that while the 1 distinct art unit provides a stable technical baseline, the different examiners may have unique individual approaches to prosecution. Strategy should balance the specific requirements of the art unit with the tendencies of each examiner.
In the Chemistry & Materials sector, maintaining consistency across filings is crucial. Having both cases in the same art unit allows for a unified approach to the prior art, even if the examiners differ. Practitioners can leverage this concentration to ensure that arguments made in one case do not negatively impact the other, while still addressing the specific concerns raised by GROOMS, NOA WILLIAM FRAN.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| GROOMS, NOA WILLIAM FRAN | 1 | 75.0% | +0.0% |
| HOBAN, MATTHEW E | 1 | 60.4% | +25.3% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18720674 | MICROJET REACTOR BASED SYNTHESIS OF NANOPHOSPHORS | GROOMS, NOA WILLIAM FRAN | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17680335 | ANNEALING METHOD | HOBAN, MATTHEW E | 85d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1734 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18720674 | MICROJET REACTOR BASED SYNTHESIS OF NANOPHOSPHORS | GROOMS, NOA WILLIAM FRAN | — | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 17, 2024 |
| 17680335 | ANNEALING METHOD | HOBAN, MATTHEW E | 1734 | §103 | Final Rejection | 85d overdue | Pending | Feb 25, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial