Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 13, 2026

UMC Utrecht Holding B.V.

9 pending office actions • 9 art units • 9 examiners • 0 of 9 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 2 patents granted in the last 365 days

Portfolio Summary

9
Total Pending OAs
6
Non-Final OAs
3
Final Rejections
0
Advisory / Quayle

Response Deadline Pressure

Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 5 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.

1
Overdue
0
Due this week
4
Due this month
0
Due in next 60 days
0
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. 5 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date.

-30dToday30d60d90d120d
Overdue (1)Due ≤ 30 days (4)

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.

2
Hard (22%)
6
Medium (67%)
1
Easy (11%)
0
Unknown (0%)

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
§101 + other1 (11%)
§103 only4 (44%)
§102 only1 (11%)
§112 only1 (11%)
Double-patenting + other1 (11%)
Multi-statute (no §101)1 (11%)

Industry Mix

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

7
Life Sciences
78% of docket
0
Information Tech
0% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
0
Semiconductors
0% of docket
2
Mechanical / Eng
22% 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.

90 h
Manual time on pending OAs
18 h
Time saved (low, 20%)
31 h
Time saved (mid, 35%)
0.8 wks
FTE-weeks freed (mid)

Top Examiners on this docket

ExaminerApps on this docketAllow rateInterview lift
TOKARCZYK, CHRISTOPHER B 1 43.3% +23.3%
CHANG, KYUNG SOOK 1 60.4% +41.1%
WRIGHT, SARAH C 1 41.4% +46.2%
LANE, HOLLY JOANNA 1 79.8% +17.0%
BORGEEST, CHRISTINA M 1 55.4% +21.4%
LEVERETT, MARY CHANG 1 61.1% +22.9%
LUNDE, GRACE HENRY 1 63.0% +38.9%
CHIU, TAK LIANG 1 50.0% +34.3%
ALLEN, MARIANNE P 1 60.2% +18.2%

Hard Cases (2)

Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
17995525 METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING SIGNATURES FOR PREDICTING TREATMENT RESPONSE LEVERETT, MARY CHANG 30d
18729995 ORAL DOSAGE FORMS OF A THERAPEUTICALLY ACTIVE ACID-LABILE SALT AND METHODS AND USES RELATED THERETO CHANG, KYUNG SOOK

Interview Candidates (9)

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 8 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
17926668 Screening method for effective target - E3 ligase combinations BORGEEST, CHRISTINA M 26d overdue
18029562 CONNECTOR FOR SPINAL CORRECTION LANE, HOLLY JOANNA 14d
17908545 Membrane Ubiquitin ligases to target protein degradation LUNDE, GRACE HENRY 19d
17242793 COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS COMPRISING IgA ANTIBODY CONSTRUCTS ALLEN, MARIANNE P 27d
17995525 METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING SIGNATURES FOR PREDICTING TREATMENT RESPONSE LEVERETT, MARY CHANG 30d
19128886 COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING A DNA MODIFICATION TOKARCZYK, CHRISTOPHER B
18729995 ORAL DOSAGE FORMS OF A THERAPEUTICALLY ACTIVE ACID-LABILE SALT AND METHODS AND USES RELATED THERETO CHANG, KYUNG SOOK
18706697 MULTIDRUG ANTIMICROBIAL COATING WRIGHT, SARAH C

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
3687 1
1613 1
1619 1
3773 1
1675 1
1687 1
1641 1
1777 1
1647 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
19128886 COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING A DNA MODIFICATION TOKARCZYK, CHRISTOPHER B 3687 §103 Non-Final OA Pending May 09, 2025
18729995 ORAL DOSAGE FORMS OF A THERAPEUTICALLY ACTIVE ACID-LABILE SALT AND METHODS AND USES RELATED THERETO CHANG, KYUNG SOOK 1613 §103§112 Non-Final OA Pending Jul 18, 2024
18706697 MULTIDRUG ANTIMICROBIAL COATING WRIGHT, SARAH C 1619 §103 Non-Final OA Pending May 01, 2024
18029562 CONNECTOR FOR SPINAL CORRECTION LANE, HOLLY JOANNA 3773 §102 Final Rejection 14d Pending Mar 30, 2023
17926668 Screening method for effective target - E3 ligase combinations BORGEEST, CHRISTINA M 1675 §103 Final Rejection 26d overdue Pending Nov 21, 2022
17995525 METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING SIGNATURES FOR PREDICTING TREATMENT RESPONSE LEVERETT, MARY CHANG 1687 §101§103§112 Non-Final OA 30d Pending Oct 05, 2022
17908545 Membrane Ubiquitin ligases to target protein degradation LUNDE, GRACE HENRY 1641 §103§112DP Non-Final OA 19d Pending Sep 01, 2022
17777639 Macromolecular compositions for binding small molecules CHIU, TAK LIANG 1777 §103 Non-Final OA Pending May 18, 2022
17242793 COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS COMPRISING IgA ANTIBODY CONSTRUCTS ALLEN, MARIANNE P 1647 §112 Final Rejection 27d Pending Apr 28, 2021

Managing UMC Utrecht Holding B.V.'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