USPTO Examiner CONTES DE JESUS MAYTEE MARIE - Art Unit 1632

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17253862APPLICATION OF GENE PROFILE FOR CELLS ISOLATED USING FRESH-TRACERDecember 2020May 2024Abandon4101NoNo
17254108BIOLOGICAL SAMPLE WARMING METHOD, BIOLOGICAL SAMPLE WARMING VESSEL, AND KIT FOR WARMING BIOLOGICAL SAMPLEDecember 2020February 2025Abandon5001NoNo
16972834PRODUCTION METHOD FOR NEURON-LIKE CELLSDecember 2020May 2025Allow5331YesNo
17058279CRYOPRESERVATION OF TISSUES AND ORGANSNovember 2020May 2024Allow4111NoNo
17050784GENE THERAPY FOR CNS DEGENERATIONOctober 2020April 2025Allow5311YesNo
17049372DENTAL PULP STEM CELLS AND USES THEREOFOctober 2020May 2024Abandon4301NoNo
17048707METHODS FOR MEASURING AND STABILIZING STAT3 INHIBITORSOctober 2020March 2025Abandon5321NoNo
17044680REPROGRAMMING VECTORSOctober 2020September 2024Allow4811NoNo
17025821METHOD FOR THREE-DIMENSIONALLY CULTURING PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLSeptember 2020December 2023Abandon3910NoNo
17006138METHOD OF CULTURING CELL, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING CELL SUPPORT COMPLEX, CULTURED CELL, AND CELL SUPPORT COMPLEXAugust 2020September 2024Allow4931YesNo
17003799SUPER ENHANCER FOR DRIVING PLURIPOTENCY NETWORK AND STEMNESS CIRCUITRYAugust 2020September 2023Allow3720YesNo
16991522METHODS OF VENTRAL RECEPTACLE COMPRESSION TECHNIQUE FOR SCORING MATED STATUS IN INSECTS INCLUDING FRUIT FLIESAugust 2020February 2024Allow4220YesNo
16936330METHODS FOR TELOMERE LENGTH AND GENOMIC DNA QUALITY CONTROL ANALYSIS IN PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLSJuly 2020October 2024Abandon5111NoNo
16924056RECOMBINANT PRODUCTION METHODJuly 2020January 2024Abandon4201NoNo
16912973SILOXANE POLYMER-BASED CANCER STEM CELL PREPARATION METHODJune 2020May 2025Abandon5941NoNo
16767383COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR CULTIVATION, EXPANSION, PRESERVATION AND/OR CELL PRETREATMENTMay 2020June 2024Allow4821NoNo
16838511MICROPATTERNED HYDROGEL FOR CELL CULTURESApril 2020July 2024Allow5131NoNo
16640403METHODS FOR INDUCING HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL SPECIFICITYFebruary 2020May 2024Allow5131NoNo
16635861COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TARGETING MASAS TO TREAT CANCERS WITH SPLICEOSOME MUTATIONSJanuary 2020May 2024Allow5231NoNo
16623605METHOD FOR KNOCKING OUT TARGET GENE IN T CELL IN VITRO AND crRNA USED IN THE METHODDecember 2019April 2023Abandon4001NoNo
16621707METHODS OF PRODUCING BIOENGINEERED NEURONAL ORGANOIDS (BENOS) AND USES THEREOFDecember 2019May 2023Allow4111NoNo
16620655METHOD FOR TREATING DILATED CARDIOMYOPATHYDecember 2019April 2024Abandon5231NoNo
16702755METHOD FOR INCREASING THE PROPORTION OF DESIRED CELLS FROM INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLSDecember 2019May 2024Allow5340YesNo
16606240RECOMBINATION ACTIVATING GENE (RAG) INDUCED V(D)J GENE TARGETINGOctober 2019March 2024Allow5312NoNo
16570327METHOD FOR SEPARATING MEGAKARYOCYTES AND PLATELETS, AND PLATELET SEPARATION KITSeptember 2019March 2024Abandon5401NoNo
16489142THREE-DIMENSIONAL TISSUE STRUCTURESAugust 2019June 2023Abandon4511NoNo
16533300IMMERSION DEPOSITION METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR USE IN THE SAMEAugust 2019January 2024Allow5430YesNo
16088367COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR USING SMALL MOBILE STEM CELLSSeptember 2018July 2024Allow6031YesNo
15743248NON-HUMAN ANIMAL HAVING HUMAN CD3 GENE SUBSTITUTED FOR ENDOGENOUS CD3 GENEJanuary 2018January 2023Allow6041NoNo
15519742BIPARTITE AND TRIPARTITE SIGNALING IMMUNE CELLSApril 2017September 2023Abandon6071NoNo
14922110CORTICAL INTERNEURONS AND OTHER NEURONAL CELLS PRODUCED BY THE DIRECTED DIFFERENTIATION OF PLURIPOTENT AND MULTIPOTENT CELLSOctober 2015January 2023Allow6061YesNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner CONTES DE JESUS, MAYTEE MARIE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner CONTES DE JESUS, MAYTEE MARIE works in Art Unit 1632 and has examined 31 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 58.1%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 51 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner CONTES DE JESUS, MAYTEE MARIE's allowance rate of 58.1% places them in the 20% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by CONTES DE JESUS, MAYTEE MARIE receive 2.10 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 52% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by CONTES DE JESUS, MAYTEE MARIE is 51 months. This places the examiner in the 6% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +59.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CONTES DE JESUS, MAYTEE MARIE. This interview benefit is in the 96% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 29.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 59% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 14.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 16% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 133.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 95% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

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 11.1% of allowed cases (in the 91% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

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.