Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026

Tineco Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd.

Technology areas: Chemistry & Materials • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering

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

Analysis

Tineco Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd. currently has 4 pending office actions in its patent portfolio, which falls under the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These 4 actions are assigned to 4 distinct examiners. The prosecution is distributed across 3 distinct art units, showing that the company's mechanical innovations are being reviewed by several different specialized groups. The involvement of 3 distinct art units within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector suggests a diverse range of technical subject matter.

The busiest examiner for the company is LEE, DOUGLAS, who is currently managing 1 pending office action. With 4 pending actions and 4 distinct examiners, the workload is spread evenly, with each examiner responsible for 1 action. This indicates that LEE, DOUGLAS is one of four officials currently evaluating the company's applications. The 4 to 4 ratio of actions to examiners ensures that each pending matter is being independently reviewed by a different individual. This distribution provides a variety of examiner perspectives on the company's intellectual property.

Practitioners must be prepared to handle 4 different examiner relationships across 3 different units. This profile represents a balanced prosecution environment where individual examiner attention is maintained across multiple technical departments. The involvement of 3 distinct art units suggests that the company's innovations touch upon different sub-specialties within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering sector. This data provides a baseline for future filings, as any expansion in the portfolio will likely introduce new examiners or art units.

Written from this page's own data; every figure is computed from USPTO records and verified before publication.

Portfolio Summary

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

Response Deadline Pressure

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.

0
Overdue
0
Due this week
1
Due this month
0
Due in next 60 days
0
Due later

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

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
Multi-statute (no §101)4 (100%)

Industry Mix

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

1
Life Sciences
25% of docket
0
Information Tech
0% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
0
Semiconductors
0% of docket
2
Mechanical / Eng
50% of docket
1
Business / Other
25% 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
LEE, DOUGLAS 1 45.3% +13.7%
CARRILLO, BIBI SHARIDAN 1 62.3% -15.5%
FLORES, JUAN G 1 79.5% +14.5%
ZAWORSKI, JONATHAN R 1 52.7% +26.7%

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
17640306 CLEANING MACHINE, CLEANING DEVICE, CONTROL AND INFORMATION DISPLAY METHODS THEREOF, AND STORAGE MEDIUM ZAWORSKI, JONATHAN R 27d
18845803 CHARGING AND DISCHARGING METHOD FOR CLEANING DEVICE, AND CLEANING SYSTEM LEE, DOUGLAS —
18577198 SELF-CLEANING METHOD AND CONTROL METHOD FOR COOKING DEVICE CARRILLO, BIBI SHARIDAN —
18526321 CLEANING DEVICE AND COMBINED CLEANING SYSTEM FLORES, JUAN G —

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
17640306 CLEANING MACHINE, CLEANING DEVICE, CONTROL AND INFORMATION DISPLAY METHODS THEREOF, AND STORAGE MEDIUM ZAWORSKI, JONATHAN R 27d
18845803 CHARGING AND DISCHARGING METHOD FOR CLEANING DEVICE, AND CLEANING SYSTEM LEE, DOUGLAS —
18526321 CLEANING DEVICE AND COMBINED CLEANING SYSTEM FLORES, JUAN G —

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
1714 1
3745 1
3723 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
18845803 CHARGING AND DISCHARGING METHOD FOR CLEANING DEVICE, AND CLEANING SYSTEM LEE, DOUGLAS 1714 §102§103§112 Non-Final OA — Pending Sep 10, 2024
18577198 SELF-CLEANING METHOD AND CONTROL METHOD FOR COOKING DEVICE CARRILLO, BIBI SHARIDAN — §102§103§112 Non-Final OA — Pending Jan 05, 2024
18526321 CLEANING DEVICE AND COMBINED CLEANING SYSTEM FLORES, JUAN G 3745 §103§112 Non-Final OA — Pending Dec 01, 2023
17640306 CLEANING MACHINE, CLEANING DEVICE, CONTROL AND INFORMATION DISPLAY METHODS THEREOF, AND STORAGE MEDIUM ZAWORSKI, JONATHAN R 3723 §103§112 Final Rejection 27d Pending Mar 03, 2022

Managing Tineco Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd.'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