Technology areas: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals • Chemistry & Materials
9 pending office actions • 1 client • 8 examiners • 8 art units • 0 of 9 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
The Law Office of Michael A. Sanzo, LLC is a patent law firm that has managed 695 career applications in the Chemistry & Materials technology area. The firm has a resolved allowance rate of 76.91 percent. To achieve these allowances, the firm averages 3.42 office actions per allowance, reflecting the detailed negotiation often required in this technical field. These metrics provide a window into the firm's historical performance and its approach to managing complex filings.
Currently, the firm is managing 9 pending office actions. The resolved allowance rate of 76.91 percent is based on the firm's history with 695 career applications. The average of 3.42 office actions per allowance indicates the firm's commitment to overcoming examiner rejections through multiple rounds of communication. For a practitioner, these data points highlight the firm's experience in the Chemistry & Materials technology area and its persistence in navigating the patent examination process.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 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 |
|---|---|
| §101 only | 1 (11%) |
| §101 + other | 1 (11%) |
| §103 only | 1 (11%) |
| §102 only | 1 (11%) |
| §112 only | 1 (11%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (11%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 3 (33%) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| RIOJA, MELISSA A | 2 | 49.3% | +54.1% |
| HOPKINS, ROBERT A | 1 | 84.5% | +7.6% |
| BELUNIS, THOMAS JAMES | 1 | — | — |
| SAWYER, JENNIFER C | 1 | 68.4% | -8.2% |
| OGUNBIYI, OLUWATOSIN A | 1 | 63.8% | +41.2% |
| NGUYEN, HA S | 1 | 58.5% | -20.7% |
| KAPUSHOC, STEPHEN THOMAS | 1 | 46.5% | +53.8% |
| XU, QING | 1 | 50.9% | +55.2% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 5 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18293016 | MICROORGANISMS DISPLAYING VIRAL DECOY RECEPTORS | OGUNBIYI, OLUWATOSIN A | 22d |
| 17794269 | AN EPIGENETIC CLOCK FOR GALLIFORMES | KAPUSHOC, STEPHEN THOMAS | 63d |
| 18750658 | METHOD FOR GAS SEPARATION BY MEMBRANES | HOPKINS, ROBERT A | — |
| 18641381 | FOAM STABILIZERS FOR PHENOLIC FOAM | RIOJA, MELISSA A | — |
| 18614689 | DISPERSANTS FOR SOLID-CONTAINING PHENOLIC FOAMS | BELUNIS, THOMAS JAMES | — |
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 5 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18293016 | MICROORGANISMS DISPLAYING VIRAL DECOY RECEPTORS | OGUNBIYI, OLUWATOSIN A | 22d |
| 17794269 | AN EPIGENETIC CLOCK FOR GALLIFORMES | KAPUSHOC, STEPHEN THOMAS | 63d |
| 18641381 | FOAM STABILIZERS FOR PHENOLIC FOAM | RIOJA, MELISSA A | — |
| 18265430 | PRODUCTION OF POLYURETHANE FOAM | RIOJA, MELISSA A | — |
| 17421917 | FERMENTATION BROTHS AND THEIR USE | XU, QING | — |
| Client (Assignee) | Pending OAs |
|---|---|
| Evonik | 9 |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 1764 | 2 |
| 1776 | 1 |
| 1767 | 1 |
| 1691 | 1 |
| 1645 | 1 |
| 1766 | 1 |
| 1683 | 1 |
| 1656 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Client | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18750658 | METHOD FOR GAS SEPARATION BY MEMBRANES | Evonik Operations GmbH | HOPKINS, ROBERT A | 1776 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 21, 2024 |
| 18641381 | FOAM STABILIZERS FOR PHENOLIC FOAM | Evonik Operations GmbH | RIOJA, MELISSA A | 1764 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Apr 21, 2024 |
| 18614689 | DISPERSANTS FOR SOLID-CONTAINING PHENOLIC FOAMS | Evonik Operations GmbH | BELUNIS, THOMAS JAMES | 1767 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Mar 24, 2024 |
| 18588296 | RECOVERY OF SILOXANE CYCLES | Evonik Operations GmbH | SAWYER, JENNIFER C | 1691 | §103§112DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Feb 27, 2024 |
| 18293016 | MICROORGANISMS DISPLAYING VIRAL DECOY RECEPTORS | Evonik Operations GmbH | OGUNBIYI, OLUWATOSIN A | 1645 | §101 | Non-Final OA | 22d | Pending | Jan 29, 2024 |
| 18542990 | MELT-PROCESSABLE POLYIMIDES WITH HIGH GLASS TRANSITION TEMPERATURE | Evonik Fibres GmbH | NGUYEN, HA S | 1766 | §102 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Dec 18, 2023 |
| 18265430 | PRODUCTION OF POLYURETHANE FOAM | Evonik Operations GmbH | RIOJA, MELISSA A | 1764 | §112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jun 05, 2023 |
| 17794269 | AN EPIGENETIC CLOCK FOR GALLIFORMES | Evonik Operations GmbH | KAPUSHOC, STEPHEN THOMAS | 1683 | §101§112 | Final Rejection | 63d | Pending | Jul 21, 2022 |
| 17421917 | FERMENTATION BROTHS AND THEIR USE | Evonik Operations GmbH | XU, QING | 1656 | §103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Jul 09, 2021 |
IP Author helps law firms respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial76.9% of resolved applications prosecuted by Law Office of Michael A. Riley, LLC were allowed, across 695 applications in USPTO records.
3.42 office actions per allowed application on average.
9 pending office actions as of October 2026, for 1 client, before 8 examiners in 8 art units.
