Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: 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
Circa Scientific Inc. has 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These 2 pending office actions represent the current prosecution workload for the company. The focus on Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering indicates that the company is pursuing protection for mechanical innovations in the medical field. Practitioners should note the technical scope is limited to this specific technology area.
The 2 pending office actions are split between 2 distinct art units and 2 distinct examiners. This indicates that each pending matter is being handled by a unique examiner in a unique art unit. There is no overlap in the examination process for these 2 pending office actions, which requires a separate strategy for each case. The involvement of 2 distinct art units suggests that the company's technology is recognized across different specialized groups.
ADAMS, WILLIAM PATRICK is the busiest examiner, managing 1 busiest examiner pending action. This accounts for a portion of the 2 total pending office actions in the portfolio. Because each of the 2 distinct examiners holds exactly 1 action, the workload is evenly distributed. Practitioners must engage with 2 distinct art units and 2 distinct examiners to address the current 2 pending office actions.
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) | 2 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADAMS, WILLIAM PATRICK | 1 | — | — |
| VOKES, KATHLEEN PAIGE | 1 | 55.1% | +25.9% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18798758 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EPICARDIAL ACCESS | ADAMS, WILLIAM PATRICK | — |
| 16951828 | INSTRUMENT PORT WITH FLEXIBLE SHAFT FOR EPICARDIAL ABLATION | VOKES, KATHLEEN PAIGE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16951828 | INSTRUMENT PORT WITH FLEXIBLE SHAFT FOR EPICARDIAL ABLATION | VOKES, KATHLEEN PAIGE | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3792 | 1 |
| 3783 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18798758 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EPICARDIAL ACCESS | ADAMS, WILLIAM PATRICK | 3792 | §102§103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Aug 08, 2024 |
| 16951828 | INSTRUMENT PORT WITH FLEXIBLE SHAFT FOR EPICARDIAL ABLATION | VOKES, KATHLEEN PAIGE | 3783 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Nov 18, 2020 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial