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
U TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION currently has 1 pending office action in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. This case is assigned to JOYNER, KEVIN, who is the busiest examiner for the portfolio. The company's active prosecution involves 1 distinct examiner and a single distinct art unit.
This suggests a highly centralized patent strategy for its current chemistry-related filings. Practitioners should focus on the specific requirements of JOYNER, KEVIN to resolve the 1 pending office action effectively. The concentration in a single art unit indicates a targeted technical focus that has not yet expanded into broader materials disciplines.
The outcome of this individual prosecution will be the primary indicator of success for the current filing strategy. Reliance on a single examiner means that the patent strategy is highly sensitive to the specific interpretations of that official. As the portfolio matures, diversifying across different examiners and units may help mitigate the risks associated with such a centralized prosecution profile.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| JOYNER, KEVIN | 1 | 68.3% | +23.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18262246 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DECONTAMINATING A SURFACE USING GERMICIDAL UV LIGHT | JOYNER, KEVIN | 8d overdue |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18262246 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DECONTAMINATING A SURFACE USING GERMICIDAL UV LIGHT | JOYNER, KEVIN | 8d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1799 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18262246 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DECONTAMINATING A SURFACE USING GERMICIDAL UV LIGHT | JOYNER, KEVIN | 1799 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | 8d overdue | Pending | Jul 20, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial