Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON

4 pending office actions • 3 art units • 4 examiners • 0 of 4 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 12 patents granted in the last 365 days

Portfolio Summary

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

Response Deadline Pressure

Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 4 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
1
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. 4 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date.

-30dToday30d60d90d120d
Overdue (1)Due ≤ 30 days (1)Due ≤ 60 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.

0
Hard (0%)
3
Medium (75%)
1
Easy (25%)
0
Unknown (0%)

Rejection Statute Mix

BucketCases
§103 only3 (75%)
Double-patenting only1 (25%)

Industry Mix

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

3
Life Sciences
75% of docket
0
Information Tech
0% of docket
0
Communications
0% of docket
1
Semiconductors
25% of docket
0
Mechanical / Eng
0% 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.

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
VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY 1 57.2% +28.5%
CHU, CHRIS H 1 53.1% +9.6%
DENT, ALANA HARRIS 1 44.6% +32.4%
DICKINSON, PAUL W 1 63.0% +9.5%

Interview Candidates (2)

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 2 ordered by deadline are shown.

App #TitleExaminerDue in
18651929 USE OF NOX INHIBITORS FOR TREATMENT OF CANCER VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY 26d overdue
17625226 Intratumoral TFR Cells Curtail Anti-PD-1 Treatment Efficacy DENT, ALANA HARRIS 84d

Top Art Units

Art UnitApps
1643 2
2874 1
1618 1

Pending Office Actions

App #TitleExaminerArt UnitStatutesStatusDue inAIFiled
18651929 USE OF NOX INHIBITORS FOR TREATMENT OF CANCER VAN DRUFF, SYDNEY 1643 §103 Non-Final OA 26d overdue Pending May 01, 2024
18245273 HOLLOW CORE OPTICAL WAVEGUIDES AND METHODS FOR MODIFICATION THEREOF CHU, CHRIS H 2874 §103 Non-Final OA 33d Pending Mar 14, 2023
17625226 Intratumoral TFR Cells Curtail Anti-PD-1 Treatment Efficacy DENT, ALANA HARRIS 1643 DP Non-Final OA 84d Pending Jan 06, 2022
17440067 PEPTIDE-INDUCED NK CELL ACTIVATION DICKINSON, PAUL W 1618 §103 Non-Final OA 27d Pending Sep 16, 2021

Managing UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON'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