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 • 6 patents granted in the last 365 days
Shenzhen Puremate Technology Co. Ltd. currently has 2 pending office actions within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These matters are distributed among 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. This distribution shows that the company's intellectual property is being evaluated by multiple specialized groups within the patent office. Practitioners should prepare for varying examination styles, as each matter is handled by a different individual in a different administrative unit. The presence of 2 distinct art units suggests that the portfolio covers a range of technical sub-sectors within the broader chemistry field.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is FORRY, COLTON BUSA, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. This examiner accounts for 1 of the 2 total pending office actions. With 2 distinct art units involved, the prosecution strategy must account for different technical standards and potential precedents. The presence of 2 distinct examiners suggests that the portfolio's technical breadth requires diverse expertise from the patent office. Each examiner is managing 1 pending matter, indicating a balanced distribution of the current workload across the assigned staff. This structure requires the company to maintain consistent arguments across different examination environments.
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%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FORRY, COLTON BUSA | 1 | 50.0% | +0.0% |
| RIPA, BRYAN D | 1 | 53.9% | +37.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18261082 | DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DEGRADING GASEOUS ORGANIC POLLUTANT THROUGH ELECTROCHEMICAL PROCESS | RIPA, BRYAN D | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1711 | 1 |
| 1794 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18261077 | DEVICE AND METHOD FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL DEGRADATION OF GASEOUS ORGANIC POLLUTANTS | FORRY, COLTON BUSA | 1711 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jul 25, 2023 |
| 18261082 | DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DEGRADING GASEOUS ORGANIC POLLUTANT THROUGH ELECTROCHEMICAL PROCESS | RIPA, BRYAN D | 1794 | §103§112DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jul 25, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial