Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 27, 2026

Toca Football Inc.

Technology areas: Computing & Software • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering

2 pending office actions • 2 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 5 patents granted in the last 365 days

Analysis

Toca Football Inc. currently manages 2 pending office actions within the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These actions are split between 2 distinct examiners, indicating that the portfolio's prosecution is not concentrated under a single reviewer. This distribution across 2 distinct examiners requires the applicant to manage two different sets of examiner expectations and communication styles.

The prosecution is distributed across 2 distinct art units, which suggests that the company's mechanical innovations may fall into different specialized categories at the USPTO. SIMMS JR, JOHN ELLIOTT is identified as the busiest examiner for the portfolio, currently overseeing 1 pending office action. Since the busiest examiner only holds 1 pending office action, the workload is evenly balanced between the 2 distinct examiners currently active.

Practitioners should be aware that the involvement of 2 distinct art units may lead to different average pendency rates for the 2 pending office actions. Because no single examiner or art unit dominates the workload, the prosecution strategy must be tailored to the specific requirements of both SIMMS JR, JOHN ELLIOTT and the other assigned official. This balanced approach ensures that the portfolio's progress is not dependent on the performance of a single administrative unit.

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

Portfolio Summary

2
Total Pending OAs
0
Non-Final OAs
2
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
0
Due this month
1
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.

0
Hard (0%)
2
Medium (100%)
0
Easy (0%)
0
Unknown (0%)

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
§103 only2 (100%)

Industry Mix

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

0
Life Sciences
0% of docket
1
Information Tech
50% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
0
Semiconductors
0% of docket
1
Mechanical / Eng
50% 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.

20 h
Manual time on pending OAs
4 h
Time saved (low, 20%)
7 h
Time saved (mid, 35%)
0.2 wks
FTE-weeks freed (mid)

Top Examiners on this docket

ExaminerApps on this docketAllow rateInterview lift
CADY, MATTHEW ALAN 1 0.0% +0.0%
SIMMS JR, JOHN ELLIOTT 1 65.3% +12.5%

Hard Cases (1)

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 #TitleExaminerDue in
18501005 Systems and Methods for Determining Operability Status of a Ball-Throwing Machine Through Machine Learning Techniques CADY, MATTHEW ALAN —

Interview Candidates (1)

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 #TitleExaminerDue in
18500995 Systems and Methods for Determining Ball-Throwing Machine Operability SIMMS JR, JOHN ELLIOTT 49d

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
2145 1
3711 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
18501005 Systems and Methods for Determining Operability Status of a Ball-Throwing Machine Through Machine Learning Techniques CADY, MATTHEW ALAN 2145 §103 Final Rejection — Pending Nov 02, 2023
18500995 Systems and Methods for Determining Ball-Throwing Machine Operability SIMMS JR, JOHN ELLIOTT 3711 §103 Final Rejection 49d Pending Nov 02, 2023

Managing Toca Football Inc.'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

Frequently Asked Questions

How many pending USPTO office actions does Toca Football Inc. have?

Toca Football Inc. has 2 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 2 art units and 2 examiners.

Which USPTO examiner handles the most Toca Football Inc. applications?

Matthew Alan Cady has the most, with 1 of Toca Football Inc.'s pending office actions.

What technology area are Toca Football Inc.'s patent applications in?

Mostly Computing & Software (USPTO Tech Center 2100), based on where its pending office actions are examined.

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