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 • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Sst Systems Inc. currently has 2 pending office actions in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These actions are being handled by 2 distinct examiners across 2 distinct art units. This suggests that the company's current filings cover at least two different technical sub-specialties within chemistry and materials. The presence of 2 distinct art units indicates that the subject matter of the applications is varied enough to require specialized review from different groups at the USPTO.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is EMPIE, NATHAN H, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. Since there are 2 pending office actions in total, the workload is split among the 2 distinct examiners involved. This decentralized prosecution strategy requires the company to engage with different examination styles and art unit standards simultaneously. Practitioners should note that the 1 busiest examiner pending workload represents only half of the company's active docket.
With 2 pending office actions and 2 distinct examiners, the company's strategy in Chemistry & Materials is diversified. This arrangement requires careful management of 2 distinct art units to ensure consistent results across the portfolio. The data reflects a prosecution profile that is active in multiple technical areas, meaning the outcome of the 1 busiest examiner pending case is one of two key factors in the company's immediate success.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| EMPIE, NATHAN H | 1 | 43.5% | +43.1% |
| SYLVESTER, KEVIN | 1 | 47.5% | +27.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18364130 | IMMERSION COATING METHOD UTILIZING MULTIPLE CURING WORKSTATIONS | EMPIE, NATHAN H | 61d |
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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18364130 | IMMERSION COATING METHOD UTILIZING MULTIPLE CURING WORKSTATIONS | EMPIE, NATHAN H | 61d |
| 17832011 | BULK FINISHING SYSTEM AND METHOD | SYLVESTER, KEVIN | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1712 | 1 |
| 1794 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18364130 | IMMERSION COATING METHOD UTILIZING MULTIPLE CURING WORKSTATIONS | EMPIE, NATHAN H | 1712 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 61d | Pending | Aug 02, 2023 |
| 17832011 | BULK FINISHING SYSTEM AND METHOD | SYLVESTER, KEVIN | 1794 | §103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 03, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial