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
Traceless Materials GmbH operates within the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The company's portfolio currently includes 2 pending office actions. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. This distribution shows that each pending matter is being handled by a different examiner in a different technical area of the patent office.
LE, EMILY M is the busiest examiner for the company, with 1 pending action. Given that there are 2 pending office actions and 2 distinct examiners, the workload is split between them. The presence of 2 distinct art units for only 2 pending office actions suggests that the company's applications cover diverse technical aspects within the Chemistry & Materials field. Practitioners will need to manage 2 separate prosecution tracks, each with its own examiner and art unit. LE, EMILY M handles 1 of the 2 pending office actions, while the other is managed by the second of the 2 distinct examiners.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| LE, EMILY M | 1 | 17.6% | -3.1% |
| BLEDSOE, JOSHUA CALEB | 1 | 44.4% | +52.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18735903 | PROCESS FOR PRODUCING AN ANIMAL FEED | LE, EMILY M | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18078239 | PROCESS FOR PRODUCING A THERMOPLASTIC MATERIAL, A PROCESS OF FORMING A GRANULATE OR EXTRUDATE, THERMOPLASTIC PRODUCT AND USE OF THE THERMOPLASTIC MATERIAL | BLEDSOE, JOSHUA CALEB | 11d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1793 | 1 |
| 1762 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18735903 | PROCESS FOR PRODUCING AN ANIMAL FEED | LE, EMILY M | 1793 | §102§103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jun 06, 2024 |
| 18078239 | PROCESS FOR PRODUCING A THERMOPLASTIC MATERIAL, A PROCESS OF FORMING A GRANULATE OR EXTRUDATE, THERMOPLASTIC PRODUCT AND USE OF THE THERMOPLASTIC MATERIAL | BLEDSOE, JOSHUA CALEB | 1762 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 11d overdue | Pending | Dec 09, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial