USPTO Examiner CONNORS ALEXANDRA F - Art Unit 1634

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18618894PLACENTAL MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS, METHODS OF PRODUCTION, AND PLACENTAL MESENCHYMAL STEM CELL BASED THERAPEUTICSMarch 2024February 2026Abandon2311NoNo
18221026SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PRODUCING INJECTABLE ENHANCED STEM CELL EXOSOMES, IMPROVED EXOSOMES AND METHODS OF USEJuly 2023March 2025Allow2041YesNo
18341701MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS FOR TREATMENT OF SKIN DISORDERS AND SKIN PROBLEMSJune 2023August 2025Abandon2630NoNo
18100437METHODS OF PREPARING A PRIMARY CELL SAMPLEJanuary 2023September 2024Allow2010NoNo
18003392CRANIAL NEUROPATHY THERAPEUTIC AGENT CONTAINING CULTURE SUPERNATANT FOR UMBILICAL CORD BLOOD MONOCYTIC CELLSDecember 2022March 2026Abandon3810NoNo
18056371COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATMENT OF INFLAMMATORY DISORDERSNovember 2022August 2025Abandon3331NoNo
17912246CORD BLOOD PLASMA-DERIVED EXOSOME OR MIMETIC THEREOF AND PHARMACEUTICAL USE THEREOFSeptember 2022February 2026Abandon4101NoNo
17841089METHODS FOR IMPROVING MYELOID BRIDGING IN CORD BLOOD TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTSJune 2022April 2025Abandon3420NoNo
17838068COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR POTENTIATING IMMUNE RESPONSEJune 2022December 2025Abandon4201NoNo
17696625PROCESSES AND AGENTS FOR GLAUCOMAMarch 2022August 2025Abandon4151NoNo
17685180IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE THERAPIES FOR USE WITH CARDIOMYOCYTE CELL THERAPIES, AND ASSOCIATED METHODS AND COMPOSITIONSMarch 2022May 2025Abandon3940NoNo
17585094METHODS OF PREVENTATIVE THERAPY FOR POST-TRAUMATIC OSTEOARTHRITISJanuary 2022March 2026Abandon4941NoNo
17569282ANTI-AGING COMPOSITIONS AND USES THEREOFJanuary 2022November 2025Allow4741YesNo
17501759Engineered Extracellular Vesicle Delivery Systems and Uses ThereofOctober 2021June 2025Abandon4431NoNo
17417619GENE THERAPY CONSTRUCTS FOR TREATING WILSON DISEASEJune 2021April 2025Allow4611YesNo
17416311ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUSES AND THEIR USES FOR INNER EAR THERAPYJune 2021April 2025Abandon4621NoNo
17342158Composition and Use of Interleukin Stimulated Human Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells for the Treatment of Rheumatoid ArthritisJune 2021November 2024Abandon4141YesNo
17290418DNA VECTOR FOR TARGETED GENE THERAPYApril 2021November 2024Allow4211YesNo
17287431SYNP78 (PROA27), A PROMOTER FOR THE SPECIFIC EXPRESSION OF GENES IN RETINAL GANGLION CELLSApril 2021March 2025Abandon4710NoNo
17284536CODON-OPTIMIZED TRANSGENE FOR THE TREATMENT OF PROGRESSIVE FAMILIAR INTRAHEPATIC CHOLESTASIS TYPE 3 (PFIC3)April 2021September 2025Abandon5320YesNo
17228276USE OF IMMORTALIZED PLACENTAL STEM CELLS IPSC/EXTRACELLULAR VESICLES TO ENHANCE THERAPEUTIC RECOVERY FROM TISSUE DAMAGE AND ISCHEMIA-REPERFUSION INJURY AND DELAYED ORGAN FUNCTIONApril 2021October 2025Abandon5541NoNo
17200693INJECTION SOLUTION FOR RNAMarch 2021October 2024Abandon4401NoNo
17143866ANGIOGENESIS USING STIMULATED PLACENTAL STEM CELLSJanuary 2021September 2025Abandon5631NoNo
17114784COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING STROKEDecember 2020December 2025Abandon6041NoYes
17077683ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUS (AAV)VECTORS FOR THE TREATMENT OF AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION AND OTHER OCULAR DISEASES AND DISORDERSOctober 2020February 2026Abandon6041NoNo
17046243ENGINEERED CYTOLYTIC IMMUNECELLOctober 2020June 2025Abandon5631NoNo
16647565THERAPEUTIC USES OF FLAP OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED CELLSMarch 2020September 2025Abandon6050NoNo
16645840ENRICHMENT OF NKX6.1 AND C-PEPTIDE CO-EXPRESSING CELLS DERIVED IN VITRO FROM STEM CELLSMarch 2020December 2024Abandon5731NoNo
16636249PLATFORM FOR GENERATING SAFE CELL THERAPEUTICSFebruary 2020December 2024Abandon5840NoNo
16630872CELL CULTURING MATERIALSJanuary 2020October 2024Allow5741NoYes
16604680PLATELET VESICLE-ENGINEERED CELLS FOR TARGETED TISSUE REPAIROctober 2019October 2024Abandon6051NoNo
16566675COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR MICROGLIA REPLACEMENT THERAPYSeptember 2019July 2025Allow6041YesNo
16469608MODULATION OF ISCHEMIC CELL BIOENERGETICSJune 2019January 2026Abandon6051YesNo
16331426PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION FOR PREVENTING OR TREATING IMMUNE DISEASE OR INFLAMMATORY DISEASE INCLUDING INFLAMMATORY STIMULATED MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLMarch 2019February 2026Abandon6071NoNo
16096967Derivation and Self-Renewal of Multipotent Cells and Uses ThereofOctober 2018October 2024Abandon6051NoNo
16113813METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF TISSUEAugust 2018October 2024Abandon6050YesYes
16072345IMMUNE CELL SELECTION, EXPANSION, AND USEJuly 2018January 2025Abandon6051YesNo
16043520ACELLULAR REGENERATIVE PRODUCTS AND METHODS OF THEIR MANUFACTUREJuly 2018December 2023Abandon6050NoYes
15420901TISSUE-ENGINEERED CONSTRUCTSJanuary 2017December 2024Abandon6081YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
91.2%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
6
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(33.3%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
4
(66.7%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
50.5%
Higher than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

Filing a Notice of Appeal can sometimes lead to allowance even before the appeal is fully briefed or decided by the PTAB. This occurs when the examiner or their supervisor reconsiders the rejection during the mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) after the appeal is filed.

In this dataset, 33.3% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F works in Art Unit 1634 and has examined 26 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 15.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 58 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F's allowance rate of 15.4% places them in the 2% 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 CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F receive 3.73 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 96% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F is 58 months. This places the examiner in the 1% 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 +27.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CONNORS, ALEXANDRA F. This interview benefit is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 0.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.

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 15% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 92% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 75.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 63% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 33.3% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 125.0% 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 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.

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.
  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • 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.
  • Request pre-appeal conferences: PACs are highly effective with this examiner. Before filing a full appeal brief, request a PAC to potentially resolve issues without full PTAB review.
  • 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.