Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
1 pending office actions • 1 art units • 1 examiners • 0 of 1 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready
Veeder-Root Company maintains a patent portfolio in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. The company currently faces 1 pending office action. This action is assigned to 1 distinct examiner, GRAY, PAUL J, within 1 distinct art unit. GRAY, PAUL J is the busiest examiner with 1 busiest examiner pending. This indicates that the company's current prosecution efforts are entirely focused on this 1 distinct examiner. The concentration in 1 distinct art unit suggests a specific technical focus for the pending matter.
With only 1 pending office action, the company has a very narrow prosecution footprint. Practitioners should focus on the specific examination style of the 1 distinct examiner to navigate this single pending case. The lack of examiner diversity means there is no internal baseline for comparing examiner behavior within this portfolio. Consequently, the immediate success of the company's patent strategy depends on the interactions with GRAY, PAUL J. Every response to the 1 pending office action must be carefully tailored to the specific requirements of the 1 distinct art unit. This concentration means that the company's immediate patent prospects are shaped by a single individual's interpretation.
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.
| Bucket | Cases |
|---|---|
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (100%) |
How the docket's pending cases split across USPTO tech-center bands.
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.
| Examiner | Apps on this docket | Allow rate | Interview lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| GRAY, PAUL J | 1 | 78.5% | +10.7% |
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 # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17894513 | FUEL STORAGE AND SUPPLY ARRANGEMENT HAVING FUEL CONDITIONING ASSEMBLY | GRAY, PAUL J | — |
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 # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17894513 | FUEL STORAGE AND SUPPLY ARRANGEMENT HAVING FUEL CONDITIONING ASSEMBLY | GRAY, PAUL J | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3753 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17894513 | FUEL STORAGE AND SUPPLY ARRANGEMENT HAVING FUEL CONDITIONING ASSEMBLY | GRAY, PAUL J | 3753 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | — | Pending | Aug 24, 2022 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free TrialVeeder-Root Company has 1 pending office actions as of October 2026, spread across 1 art units and 1 examiners.
Paul J Gray has the most, with 1 of Veeder-Root Company's pending office actions.
Mostly Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering (USPTO Tech Center 3700), based on where its pending office actions are examined.