Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Semiconductors, Circuits & Optics • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 3 patents granted in the last 365 days
Audi AG currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This volume of active prosecution is distributed across 2 distinct examiners and distinct art units. The ratio of pending actions to examiners suggests a fragmented portfolio where no individual examiner holds significant influence over the company's current outcomes.
MANLEY, SHERMAN D is identified as the busiest examiner for this portfolio. This individual is responsible for 1 pending office action, which is 1 of the total pending actions for Audi AG. Because the actions are split between distinct art units, the prosecution strategy appears to be specialized rather than concentrated in a single administrative silo. Practitioners should note that with distinct examiners involved, the current data set provides a baseline for predicting examiner behavior across the USPTO for this entity. The presence of distinct art units indicates that the mechanical and medical engineering components of the portfolio are being evaluated under different examination standards.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MANLEY, SHERMAN D | 1 | 84.0% | +11.7% |
| ANDREWS, MICHAEL | 1 | 64.5% | +24.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19162263 | METHOD FOR OPERATING A DRIVE DEVICE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE AND CORRESPONDING DRIVE DEVICE | MANLEY, SHERMAN D | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18409629 | ROTOR FOR AN ELECTRIC MACHINE | ANDREWS, MICHAEL | 43d |
| 19162263 | METHOD FOR OPERATING A DRIVE DEVICE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE AND CORRESPONDING DRIVE DEVICE | MANLEY, SHERMAN D | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3747 | 1 |
| 2834 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19162263 | METHOD FOR OPERATING A DRIVE DEVICE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE AND CORRESPONDING DRIVE DEVICE | MANLEY, SHERMAN D | 3747 | §102§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 04, 2025 |
| 18409629 | ROTOR FOR AN ELECTRIC MACHINE | ANDREWS, MICHAEL | 2834 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 43d | Pending | Jan 10, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial