Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Chemistry & Materials
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Søuld Aps maintains 1 pending office action in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The prosecution involves 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit. With 1 pending office action, the company's current engagement with the USPTO is highly focused. The use of 1 distinct art unit suggests the material science claims are being reviewed within a specific chemical classification, which can lead to a consistent examination process.
JEREMY R PIERCE is the busiest examiner, responsible for 1 pending office action. This examiner is the only one currently assigned to the company's pending matters. Practitioners should focus on the specific feedback provided by JEREMY R PIERCE to advance the application toward allowance. The concentration of the workload under 1 distinct examiner allows for a targeted response strategy that addresses the examiner's concerns directly.
The presence of 1 pending office action indicates that the company is prioritizing a specific innovation in the Chemistry & Materials field. By working with 1 distinct examiner in 1 distinct art unit, the company can avoid the complexities of managing multiple different examination timelines. This streamlined approach is efficient for a company with a focused intellectual property strategy, allowing for a high level of detail in its prosecution efforts. JEREMY R PIERCE is the primary contact for this active matter.
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 (100%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PIERCE, JEREMY R | 1 | 56.8% | +43.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18557833 | ZOSTERA MARINA FIBER OBJECT WITH IMPROVED ACOUSTIC AND THERMAL PROPERTIES | PIERCE, JEREMY R | 61d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1789 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18557833 | ZOSTERA MARINA FIBER OBJECT WITH IMPROVED ACOUSTIC AND THERMAL PROPERTIES | PIERCE, JEREMY R | 1789 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 61d | Pending | Oct 27, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial