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 • 5 patents granted in the last 365 days
Third Pole, Inc. maintains 2 pending office actions within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. These actions are split between 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units, indicating that each active matter is being handled in a different administrative section of the office. This distribution suggests that the company's current prosecution is not centralized, which may lead to different examination experiences for the 2 pending applications. Practitioners should note that the lack of overlap between the 2 distinct art units means that the technical review is being conducted by separate groups within the patent office.
The busiest examiner for the portfolio is LEE, JOHN, who is responsible for 1 busiest examiner pending office action. Given that the total number of pending office actions is 2, the workload is divided, with LEE, JOHN managing 1 of the 2 active cases. This division of labor between 2 distinct examiners means that no single individual has total control over the portfolio's active matters. The presence of 1 busiest examiner pending office action alongside 2 total pending actions highlights a balanced distribution of work across the identified examiners. Understanding the specific approach of LEE, JOHN is important, but it represents only one part of the company's overall strategy in the Chemistry & Materials sector.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| LEE, JOHN | 1 | 31.7% | +37.7% |
| ELLABIB, MAAP AHMED | 1 | 64.0% | +37.3% |
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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17819582 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING NITRIC OXIDE USING MICROWAVE ENERGY | LEE, JOHN | — |
| 17693279 | Systems and Methods for Nitric Oxide Generation and Delivery | ELLABIB, MAAP AHMED | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1794 | 1 |
| 3785 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17819582 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING NITRIC OXIDE USING MICROWAVE ENERGY | LEE, JOHN | 1794 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Aug 12, 2022 |
| 17693279 | Systems and Methods for Nitric Oxide Generation and Delivery | ELLABIB, MAAP AHMED | 3785 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Mar 11, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free TrialThird Pole, Inc. has 2 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 2 art units and 2 examiners.
John Lee has the most, with 1 of Third Pole, Inc.'s pending office actions.
Mostly Chemistry & Materials (USPTO Tech Center 1700), based on where its pending office actions are examined.
