Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18676200 | AZA-TETRACYCLIC OXAZEPINE COMPOUNDS AND USES THEREOF | May 2024 | April 2025 | Allow | 11 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18424488 | CEREBLON-BASED KRAS DEGRADING PROTACS AND USES RELATED THERETO | January 2024 | July 2024 | Allow | 6 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18448122 | METHOD OF TREATING SCLC AND MANAGING HEPATOTOXICITY | August 2023 | March 2024 | Allow | 7 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17587185 | EIF4E-INHIBITING COMPOUNDS AND METHODS | January 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17630421 | THERAPEUTIC AGENT FOR CANCER HAVING RESISTANCE TO ANTI-CCR4 ANTIBODY | January 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17619338 | COMPOUNDS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF AS ANTIBACTERIAL AGENTS | December 2021 | July 2025 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17596531 | FUSED RING COMPOUND AS FGFR AND VEGFR DUAL INHIBITOR | December 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17618761 | HSP90-BINDING CONJUGATES AND COMBINATION THERAPIES THEREOF | December 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17618173 | SULFONAMIDE DERIVATIVES AND USES THEREOF | December 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17612491 | CRYSTAL FORM OF TREPROSTINIL SODIUM SALT AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR | November 2021 | May 2025 | Allow | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17607090 | SOLID FORMS OF A PARP7 INHIBITOR | October 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17497994 | 2-(2,4,5-SUBSTITUTED PHENYLAMINO) PYRIMIDINE DERIVATIVE AND CRYSTALLINE FORM B THEREOF | October 2021 | June 2025 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17600808 | COMPOUNDS AND METHODS OF TREATING CANCERS | October 2021 | July 2025 | Allow | 45 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17461489 | QUINOLINE AMIDES AND METHODS OF USING SAME | August 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16957293 | CANCER THERAPEUTIC | June 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 48 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner BELL, SARA ELIZABETH works in Art Unit 1625 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 69.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.
Examiner BELL, SARA ELIZABETH's allowance rate of 69.2% places them in the 23% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by BELL, SARA ELIZABETH receive 1.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 12% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BELL, SARA ELIZABETH is 41 months. This places the examiner in the 5% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +40.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BELL, SARA ELIZABETH. This interview benefit is in the 89% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 1% percentile). This examiner rarely makes examiner's amendments compared to other examiners. You should expect to make all necessary claim amendments yourself through formal amendment practice.
Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 1% percentile). This examiner rarely issues Quayle actions compared to other examiners. Allowances typically come directly without a separate action for formal matters.
Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:
Not Legal Advice: The information provided in this report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with a qualified patent attorney or agent for advice specific to your situation.
No Guarantees: We do not provide any guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the statistics presented above. Patent prosecution statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data and are subject to data quality limitations, processing errors, and changes in USPTO practices over time.
Limitation of Liability: Under no circumstances will IronCrow AI be liable for any outcome, decision, or action resulting from your reliance on the statistics, analysis, or recommendations presented in this report. Past prosecution patterns do not guarantee future results.
Use at Your Own Risk: While we strive to provide accurate and useful prosecution statistics, you should independently verify any information that is material to your prosecution strategy and use your professional judgment in all patent prosecution matters.