Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026

HiViz, LLC

4 pending office actions • 3 art units • 4 examiners • 0 of 4 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 6 patents granted in the last 365 days

Portfolio Summary

4
Total Pending OAs
1
Non-Final OAs
3
Final Rejections
0
Advisory / Quayle

Response Deadline Pressure

Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 4 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.

2
Overdue
0
Due this week
2
Due this month
0
Due in next 60 days
0
Due later

Deadline Fire Line

Every pending office action with a known statutory deadline, placed on a days-until-due axis. Dots left of Today are overdue; the further right, the more runway. Cases that share a deadline window stack vertically. 4 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date.

-30dToday30d60d90d120d
Overdue (2)Due ≤ 30 days (2)

Case Difficulty Mix

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.

0
Hard (0%)
4
Medium (100%)
0
Easy (0%)
0
Unknown (0%)

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
§103 only4 (100%)

Industry Mix

How the docket's pending cases split across USPTO tech-center bands.

0
Life Sciences
0% of docket
0
Information Tech
0% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
3
Semiconductors
75% of docket
1
Mechanical / Eng
25% of docket
0
Business / Other
0% of docket

Time-on-OA Estimate

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.

40 h
Manual time on pending OAs
8 h
Time saved (low, 20%)
14 h
Time saved (mid, 35%)
0.3 wks
FTE-weeks freed (mid)

Top Examiners on this docket

ExaminerApps on this docketAllow rateInterview lift
GYLLSTROM, BRYON T 1 67.7% +8.0%
HAN, JASON 1 68.1% +31.9%
NGUYEN, THONG Q 1 67.6% +11.9%
PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R 1 63.5% +47.2%

Interview Candidates (3)

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 3 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
18305023 COORDINATED MULTI-VEHICLE LIGHTING SYSTEM PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R 117d overdue
18639229 LIGHTBAR AND BEACON WARNING LIGHT HAN, JASON 28d overdue
18691836 GLARE REDUCTION SYSTEM NGUYEN, THONG Q 30d

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
2875 2
2872 1
3667 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
18908630 FLIP-UP RACK ILLUMINATION SYSTEM GYLLSTROM, BRYON T 2875 §103 Final Rejection 14d Pending Oct 07, 2024
18639229 LIGHTBAR AND BEACON WARNING LIGHT HAN, JASON 2875 §103 Final Rejection 28d overdue Pending Apr 18, 2024
18691836 GLARE REDUCTION SYSTEM NGUYEN, THONG Q 2872 §103 Non-Final OA 30d Pending Mar 13, 2024
18305023 COORDINATED MULTI-VEHICLE LIGHTING SYSTEM PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R 3667 §103 Final Rejection 117d overdue Pending Apr 21, 2023

Managing HiViz, LLC's Patent Portfolio?

IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.

Start Free Trial

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month