USPTO Examiner RAHMAN MASUDUR - Art Unit 1633

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17436872SILICIFIED IMMUNOGENIC CELLS, METHODS OF MAKING, AND METHODS OF USINGSeptember 2021October 2024Allow6031YesNo
17256527MITOCHONDRIAL AUGMENTATION THERAPY OF OCULAR DISEASESDecember 2020November 2024Allow4610NoNo
17253046CELLDecember 2020January 2025Abandon4901NoNo
17051461THREE-DIMENSIONAL CULTURE METHOD, THREE-DIMENSIONAL CULTURE STRUCTURE, AND THREE-DIMENSIONAL CULTURE STRUCTURE MANUFACTURING METHODOctober 2020November 2024Abandon4821YesNo
17050741MYOSIN 15 PROMOTERS AND USES THEREOFOctober 2020September 2024Allow4701YesNo
17047990COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING DUCHENNE MUSCULAR DYSTROPHYOctober 2020June 2025Allow5611YesNo
17066378METHOD OF ASSESSING WOUND HEALING POTENCY OF A MESENCHYMAL STEM POPULATION AND RELATED METHODS OF SELECTING MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS AND IDENTIFYING TISSUE AS STARTING MATERIAL FOR PRODUCING A MESENCHYMAL STEM CELL POPULATIONOctober 2020June 2025Allow5741YesNo
16978800RECOMBINANT ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUSES ENCODING SERPIN PEPTIDES AND USES THEREOFSeptember 2020December 2024Allow5121NoNo
16965226DEVICE FOR PRODUCING GLOBULES OF ADIPOSE TISSUEJuly 2020September 2024Allow5020YesNo
16957896CELL POPULATION INCLUDING ADHESIVE STEM CELLS, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITIONJune 2020September 2024Allow5111YesNo
16894569GENERATION OF FUNCTIONAL NEUTROPHILS AND MACROPHAGES FROM INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS IN CHEMICALLY DEFINED CONDITIONS USING TRANSIENT EXPRESSION OF ETV2June 2020May 2025Allow5931NoNo
16568707HUMAN HOMOGENEOUS AMNIOTIC FLUID STEM CELL LINES AND USES THEREOFSeptember 2019November 2024Allow6051YesNo
16479297APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR IN VITRO PRECLINICAL HUMAN TRIALSJuly 2019February 2025Allow6021NoNo
15771781METHOD FOR PRODUCING CELL POPULATION COMPRISING MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS, MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS, CELL POPULATION, AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITIONApril 2018January 2025Abandon6061YesNo

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 RAHMAN, MASUDUR - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RAHMAN, MASUDUR works in Art Unit 1633 and has examined 14 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 78.6%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 56 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RAHMAN, MASUDUR's allowance rate of 78.6% places them in the 48% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by RAHMAN, MASUDUR receive 2.29 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 60% 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 RAHMAN, MASUDUR is 56 months. This places the examiner in the 3% 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 -2.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RAHMAN, MASUDUR. This interview benefit is in the 9% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 27.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 52% 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 28.6% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 42% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

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 18.2% of allowed cases (in the 94% 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:

  • 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.