Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
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
Tama Group maintains 2 pending office actions within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The prosecution of these matters is split between 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. This distribution requires the company to navigate multiple sets of examination criteria within the chemistry sector. The use of 2 distinct art units indicates that the applications may cover diverse sub-fields within the broader Chemistry & Materials category.
The busiest examiner, WEYDEMEYER, ETHAN, is currently handling 1 pending office action. Since there are 2 distinct examiners for the 2 pending office actions, the workload is balanced. This structure means that the prosecution strategy for Tama Group must account for the specific tendencies of 2 distinct art units simultaneously. Practitioners should be prepared for unique procedural feedback from the 2 distinct examiners, as no 1 individual manages more than 1 pending office action for the company at this time. Managing the 2 pending office actions across 2 distinct art units requires a coordinated effort to ensure consistency in the Chemistry & Materials technology area.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| TECCO, ANDREW M | 1 | 65.4% | +24.7% |
| WEYDEMEYER, ETHAN | 1 | 44.2% | +44.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18697177 | Wrapping Material and Methods of Making Same | WEYDEMEYER, ETHAN | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18697167 | Methods of Using Wrapping Material to Wrap An Agricultural Product | TECCO, ANDREW M | 9d |
| 18697177 | Wrapping Material and Methods of Making Same | WEYDEMEYER, ETHAN | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3731 | 1 |
| 1783 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18697167 | Methods of Using Wrapping Material to Wrap An Agricultural Product | TECCO, ANDREW M | 3731 | §103 | Final Rejection | 9d | Pending | Mar 29, 2024 |
| 18697177 | Wrapping Material and Methods of Making Same | WEYDEMEYER, ETHAN | 1783 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Mar 29, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial