Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology areas: Transportation, E-Commerce & Mechanical Systems • Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
3 pending office actions • 2 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 16 patents granted in the last 365 days
Vermeer Manufacturing Company currently has 3 pending office actions in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These 3 actions are distributed across 2 distinct art units, showing a focused technical scope. There are 3 distinct examiners assigned to these 3 actions, so each case is being reviewed by a different person. This means the company must navigate the specific requirements of 2 art units while interacting with 3 different examiners to resolve these 3 pending matters. No two actions share the same examiner.
SHUTTY, DAVID G is the busiest examiner, managing 1 pending office action. Since all 3 examiners have exactly 1 action, the workload is evenly split among the 3 distinct examiners. This lack of concentration means that no single examiner's tendencies will dominate the outcome of the 3 pending actions. Practitioners should be prepared for 3 unique sets of feedback across the 2 distinct art units. The 3 pending office actions show a diverse set of interactions with the patent office for a portfolio of this size. Each action requires a strategy tailored to the specific examiner and art unit involved.
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) | 3 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SHUTTY, DAVID G | 1 | 69.0% | +12.7% |
| SCOVILLE, BLAKE E | 1 | 73.6% | +29.3% |
| COOLEY, CHARLES E | 1 | 79.0% | +15.2% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19311943 | METHODS OF TRANSFERRING SUPPLIES OF BALE WRAP MATERIAL | SHUTTY, DAVID G | — |
| 18852978 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR OPERATING EXCAVATION MACHINES | SCOVILLE, BLAKE E | — |
| 18670242 | MIXING SYSTEMS HAVING ROLLER ASSEMBLIES | COOLEY, CHARLES E | — |
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 # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19311943 | METHODS OF TRANSFERRING SUPPLIES OF BALE WRAP MATERIAL | SHUTTY, DAVID G | — |
| 18852978 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR OPERATING EXCAVATION MACHINES | SCOVILLE, BLAKE E | — |
| 18670242 | MIXING SYSTEMS HAVING ROLLER ASSEMBLIES | COOLEY, CHARLES E | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3731 | 1 |
| 3671 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19311943 | METHODS OF TRANSFERRING SUPPLIES OF BALE WRAP MATERIAL | SHUTTY, DAVID G | 3731 | §103§112 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Aug 27, 2025 |
| 18852978 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR OPERATING EXCAVATION MACHINES | SCOVILLE, BLAKE E | 3671 | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 30, 2024 |
| 18670242 | MIXING SYSTEMS HAVING ROLLER ASSEMBLIES | COOLEY, CHARLES E | — | §102§103 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | May 21, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial