Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 3 patents granted in the last 365 days
Horl 1993 GmbH currently manages 1 pending office action within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, indicating a highly focused prosecution effort. GUMP, MICHAEL ANTHONY is the busiest examiner for this portfolio, overseeing 1 pending office action. The outcome of the company's current patent filing is therefore entirely dependent on the examination practices and decisions of this specific individual.
The involvement of 1 distinct art unit suggests that the technology is categorized within a specialized administrative group of Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering. For the practitioner, this means that prosecution strategy must be tailored to the specific norms and prior art search patterns of that unit. Since GUMP, MICHAEL ANTHONY is the only examiner currently handling a pending matter for Horl 1993 GmbH, their historical data regarding allowance rates and interview receptivity will be the most important factor in the prosecution process.
With 1 pending office action, there is no opportunity to compare different examiner responses or art unit efficiencies within the current portfolio. The practitioner should focus on building a clear record with the assigned examiner to resolve the 1 pending office action. Because the portfolio is concentrated in a single art unit, understanding the specific preferences of that group is essential for advancing the patent objectives of Horl 1993 GmbH.
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 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| GUMP, MICHAEL ANTHONY | 1 | 63.7% | +51.5% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18044533 | SHARPENING JIG HAVING AN ADJUSTABLE ANGLE | GUMP, MICHAEL ANTHONY | 93d overdue |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3723 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18044533 | SHARPENING JIG HAVING AN ADJUSTABLE ANGLE | GUMP, MICHAEL ANTHONY | 3723 | §103 | Non-Final OA | 93d overdue | Pending | Mar 08, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial