Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Computing & Software
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Seibu Electric & Machinery Co. Ltd. has 2 pending office actions in the Computing & Software technology area. These actions are split between 2 distinct examiners but are located within 1 distinct art unit. This structure indicates that the company's current software-related filings are being evaluated within a single specialized technical group at the patent office, ensuring a consistent technical framework for the review.
PHAM, THOMAS K is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, with 1 pending office action currently under review. This represents a portion of the company's 2 active office actions. Because both pending actions are housed in 1 art unit, the prosecution strategy can remain focused on the specific guidelines and precedents of that single unit. However, the involvement of 2 distinct examiners means that the company must address 2 different sets of examiner feedback within that shared technical framework. Practitioners should be prepared to manage 2 separate examiner relationships while leveraging the consistency provided by the 1 art unit assignment. This balanced profile allows for specialized review while maintaining a relatively streamlined prosecution path for the company's computing and software interests.
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 |
|---|---|
| §102 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PHAM, THOMAS K | 1 | 63.4% | +20.6% |
| NORTON, JENNIFER L | 1 | 49.8% | +2.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18699172 | MACHINING PROCESSING SYSTEM AND HELP PROCESSING METHOD | NORTON, JENNIFER L | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18699157 | MACHINING PROCESSING APPARATUS AND MACHINING CONDITIONS SETTING METHOD | PHAM, THOMAS K | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 2117 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18699157 | MACHINING PROCESSING APPARATUS AND MACHINING CONDITIONS SETTING METHOD | PHAM, THOMAS K | — | §102 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Oct 25, 2024 |
| 18699172 | MACHINING PROCESSING SYSTEM AND HELP PROCESSING METHOD | NORTON, JENNIFER L | 2117 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Apr 05, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial