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
Next Neurotech currently manages 1 pending office action within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. This single matter is assigned to 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit. The concentration in this technology area reflects a specialized focus on medical devices or mechanical engineering. Practitioners can monitor the specific trends of this art unit to better understand the examination process. The presence of only 1 pending office action indicates a lean portfolio at this stage of prosecution. This allows the company to focus its resources on a single set of patent office requirements.
The busiest examiner for the company is PORTER, JR, GARY A, who is responsible for 1 pending office action. This individual handles the entirety of the company's current workload at the patent office. With 1 distinct examiner and 1 distinct art unit, the prosecution environment is highly focused. The workload of 1 busiest examiner pending 1 matter shows that there is no distribution of active cases across different examiners. This centralized structure simplifies communication and ensures that the technical arguments are reviewed by a single individual. It also means that the outcome of the current prosecution is tied to the specific standards of one art unit.
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 |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PORTER, JR, GARY A | 1 | 68.8% | +25.2% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18274159 | MULTI-CONTACT INTRACEREBRAL FUNCTIONAL EXPLORATION PROBE | PORTER, JR, GARY A | 12d |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18274159 | MULTI-CONTACT INTRACEREBRAL FUNCTIONAL EXPLORATION PROBE | PORTER, JR, GARY A | 12d |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3796 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18274159 | MULTI-CONTACT INTRACEREBRAL FUNCTIONAL EXPLORATION PROBE | PORTER, JR, GARY A | 3796 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 12d | Pending | Jul 25, 2023 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial