Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 4 patents granted in the last 365 days
Gdm S P A has 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These actions are distributed across 2 distinct art units, indicating that each pending matter is classified in a different technical area. The company is currently working with 2 distinct examiners, so each case is being reviewed by a different person at the patent office. This variety suggests that even with a small number of pending actions, the company is engaging with multiple specialized groups.
WITTENSCHLAEGER, THOMAS M is listed as the busiest examiner for this portfolio, currently handling 1 pending office action. Since there are 2 pending office actions and 2 distinct examiners, each examiner is responsible for 1 case. The fact that there are 2 distinct art units for 2 actions suggests a high degree of technical diversity for such a small number of pending matters. Practitioners will need to manage 2 separate relationships across 2 different art units to move these 2 pending actions forward. This requires a customized approach for each examiner to address the specific technical requirements of each art unit.
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 |
|---|---|
| §112 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| WITTENSCHLAEGER, THOMAS M | 1 | 71.6% | +11.7% |
| WRIGHT, ALEXANDER SCOTT | 1 | 73.8% | -1.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18782760 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING AN ABSORBENT SANITARY ARTICLE | WRIGHT, ALEXANDER SCOTT | 46d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19206126 | Apparatus for producing folded underwear pads | WITTENSCHLAEGER, THOMAS M | 15d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3731 | 1 |
| 1745 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19206126 | Apparatus for producing folded underwear pads | WITTENSCHLAEGER, THOMAS M | 3731 | §112 | Final Rejection | 15d overdue | Pending | May 13, 2025 |
| 18782760 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING AN ABSORBENT SANITARY ARTICLE | WRIGHT, ALEXANDER SCOTT | 1745 | §103§112 | Final Rejection | 46d | Pending | Jul 24, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free TrialGdm S P A has 2 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 2 art units and 2 examiners.
Thomas M Wittenschlaeger has the most, with 1 of Gdm S P A's pending office actions.
Mostly Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering (USPTO Tech Center 3700), based on where its pending office actions are examined.
