Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026

Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH

7 pending office actions • 6 art units • 7 examiners • 0 of 7 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 13 patents granted in the last 365 days

Portfolio Summary

7
Total Pending OAs
3
Non-Final OAs
4
Final Rejections
0
Advisory / Quayle

Response Deadline Pressure

Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 3 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.

1
Overdue
0
Due this week
1
Due this month
0
Due in next 60 days
1
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. 3 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date.

-30dToday30d60d90d120d
Overdue (1)Due ≤ 30 days (1)Due later (1)

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.

4
Hard (57%)
3
Medium (43%)
0
Easy (0%)
0
Unknown (0%)

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
§101 only2 (29%)
§101 + other1 (14%)
§103 only3 (43%)
Multi-statute (no §101)1 (14%)

Industry Mix

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

0
Life Sciences
0% of docket
6
Information Tech
86% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
0
Semiconductors
0% of docket
1
Mechanical / Eng
14% 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.

70 h
Manual time on pending OAs
14 h
Time saved (low, 20%)
24 h
Time saved (mid, 35%)
0.6 wks
FTE-weeks freed (mid)

Top Examiners on this docket

ExaminerApps on this docketAllow rateInterview lift
UBER, NATHAN C 1 3.4% +5.5%
FOROUHARNEJAD, FAEZEH 1 66.7% +26.5%
HALE, BROOKS T 1 49.4% +33.0%
BAKER, IRENE H 1 53.0% +26.7%
SOMERS, MARC S 1 64.9% +34.4%
KHAN, SHAHID K 1 74.4% +15.0%
WILLIS, AMANDA LYNN 1 35.9% +26.1%

Hard Cases (4)

Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 4 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
18466746 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING A RISK OF PARTLY OVERRULED CONTENT BASED ON CITATIONALLY RELATED CONTENT HALE, BROOKS T 16d
17375657 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR THE AUTOMATIC CATEGORIZATION OF TEXT WILLIS, AMANDA LYNN 77d
19181065 COMPUTER TOOL FOR DETERMINING APPLICABLE LEGAL CLAIMS FROM A FACT PATTERN UBER, NATHAN C
18465973 INTERACTIVE TOOL FOR DETERMINING A HEADNOTE REPORT BAKER, IRENE H

Interview Candidates (6)

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 6 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
18917941 RETRIEVAL-AUGMENTED CONTENT GENERATION FOR LEGAL RESEARCH FOROUHARNEJAD, FAEZEH 9d overdue
18466746 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING A RISK OF PARTLY OVERRULED CONTENT BASED ON CITATIONALLY RELATED CONTENT HALE, BROOKS T 16d
17375657 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR THE AUTOMATIC CATEGORIZATION OF TEXT WILLIS, AMANDA LYNN 77d
18465973 INTERACTIVE TOOL FOR DETERMINING A HEADNOTE REPORT BAKER, IRENE H
18465971 DETECTING CITED WITH CONNECTIONS IN LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND GENERATING RECORDS OF SAME SOMERS, MARC S
17980360 SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BUILDING DOCUMENT RELATIONSHIPS AND AGGREGATES KHAN, SHAHID K

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
2166 2
3626 1
2152 1
2159 1
2146 1
2156 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
19181065 COMPUTER TOOL FOR DETERMINING APPLICABLE LEGAL CLAIMS FROM A FACT PATTERN UBER, NATHAN C 3626 §101 Final Rejection Pending Apr 16, 2025
18917941 RETRIEVAL-AUGMENTED CONTENT GENERATION FOR LEGAL RESEARCH FOROUHARNEJAD, FAEZEH 2166 §103 Final Rejection 9d overdue Pending Oct 16, 2024
18466746 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING A RISK OF PARTLY OVERRULED CONTENT BASED ON CITATIONALLY RELATED CONTENT HALE, BROOKS T 2166 §101 Non-Final OA 16d Pending Sep 13, 2023
18465973 INTERACTIVE TOOL FOR DETERMINING A HEADNOTE REPORT BAKER, IRENE H 2152 §103§112 Final Rejection Pending Sep 12, 2023
18465971 DETECTING CITED WITH CONNECTIONS IN LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND GENERATING RECORDS OF SAME SOMERS, MARC S 2159 §103 Non-Final OA Pending Sep 12, 2023
17980360 SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BUILDING DOCUMENT RELATIONSHIPS AND AGGREGATES KHAN, SHAHID K 2146 §103 Non-Final OA Pending Nov 03, 2022
17375657 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR THE AUTOMATIC CATEGORIZATION OF TEXT WILLIS, AMANDA LYNN 2156 §101§103§112 Final Rejection 77d Pending Jul 14, 2021

Managing Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH'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