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
Convergent Dental Inc. is currently managing 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These actions are spread across 2 distinct examiners and 2 distinct art units. MORAN, EDWARD JOHN is the busiest examiner for the portfolio, holding 1 pending action.
This distribution shows that each of the pending office actions is being handled by a different examiner in a separate art unit. This lack of overlap suggests that the prosecution of these actions may face different procedural hurdles or timelines. Practitioners must account for the distinct environments of the art units when coordinating responses. The involvement of multiple examiners means that the company must navigate separate sets of preferences within the broader Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering field. Since MORAN, EDWARD JOHN manages a single pending action, the workload is divided equally. This structure requires a separate strategy to address the unique technical and procedural demands of each pending office action. The presence of multiple art units indicates a diverse technical focus for the current portfolio activity. This arrangement ensures that the company's patent outcomes are subject to various individual review styles.
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 |
|---|---|
| §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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MORAN, EDWARD JOHN | 1 | 41.8% | +61.1% |
| HOLTZCLAW, MICHAEL T. | 1 | 77.6% | +16.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18659379 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF PERIODONTIC POCKETS USING DISPOSABLE INSERTS | MORAN, EDWARD JOHN | 16d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18659379 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF PERIODONTIC POCKETS USING DISPOSABLE INSERTS | MORAN, EDWARD JOHN | 16d |
| 18143848 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LASER BASED ENDODONTIC TREATMENT | HOLTZCLAW, MICHAEL T. | 23d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3772 | 1 |
| 3796 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18659379 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF PERIODONTIC POCKETS USING DISPOSABLE INSERTS | MORAN, EDWARD JOHN | 3772 | §103§112Other | Non-Final OA | 16d | Pending | May 09, 2024 |
| 18143848 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LASER BASED ENDODONTIC TREATMENT | HOLTZCLAW, MICHAEL T. | 3796 | §103 | Final Rejection | 23d | Pending | May 05, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial