Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18743724 | RECOMBINANT PARTICLE PROTEIN PRODUCT SUITABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR | June 2024 | May 2025 | Allow | 11 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18604547 | Inducible Promoter for Rice Expression System, Synthetic Biological Platform and Use Thereof | March 2024 | March 2025 | Allow | 12 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18532043 | CONTAMINATION CONTROL WHEN GROWING YEASTS | December 2023 | January 2025 | Allow | 13 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18512068 | APPLICATION OF PROKARYOTIC ARGONAUTE PROTEIN WITH ONLY RNA TARGET CLEAVAGE ACTIVITY IN RNA EDITING | November 2023 | June 2024 | Allow | 7 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18213116 | OLIGONUCLEOTIDES | June 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18147119 | Use of CD56 to predict the differentiation potential of muscle stem cells | December 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18076638 | Modification of Gene Transcription and Translation Efficiency by 5'UTR Sequence Variation | December 2022 | December 2023 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18060881 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR MODULATING APOC3 EXPRESSION | December 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17857262 | Novel mutations in Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 discovered by broad scanning mutagenesis demonstrate enhancement of DNA cleavage activity | July 2022 | January 2025 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17432361 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS TO TREAT BIETTI CRYSTALLINE DYSTROPHY | August 2021 | July 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17395011 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USING CELL-FREE NUCLEIC ACIDS TO TAILOR CANCER TREATMENT | August 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17427010 | Adeno-Associated Virus Delivery of CLN3 Polynucleotide | July 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 45 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17299377 | ACHROMOSOMAL DYNAMIC ACTIVE SYSTEMS | June 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17294165 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING GENOME-EDITED CELL | May 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 46 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17320664 | DELIVERY OF RNA TO DIFFERENT CELL TYPES | May 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17319546 | RNAI INDUCED REDUCTION OF ATAXIN-3 FOR THE TREATMENT OF SPINOCEREBELLAR ATAXIA TYPE 3 | May 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17290187 | Methods of Treatment, Prevention and Diagnosis | April 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17276235 | RAMA TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR MUTANT FOR PROMOTING PRODUCTION OF N-ACETYLGLUCOSAMINE AND USE THEREOF | March 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 48 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17191864 | TALEN-BASED GENE CORRECTION | March 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17271037 | PHOTOACTIVATABLE TET EXPRESSION CONTROL SYSTEM | February 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 48 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17270843 | DISSEMINATED NEOPLASIA CELLS AND METHODS OF THEIR USE TO CONTROL INVASIVE OR PEST SPECIES | February 2021 | August 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16980246 | NOVEL CRISPR DNA AND RNA TARGETING ENZYMES AND SYSTEMS | January 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 47 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17147874 | METHODS OF DECREASING BACKGROUND ON A SPATIAL ARRAY | January 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 50 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17055842 | DIRECTED EVOLUTION | November 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 16966567 | Gene Panel for Personalized Medicine, Method for Forming Same, and Personalized Treatment Method Using Same | October 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16980825 | VIRAL VECTOR PRODUCTION SYSTEM | September 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 49 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16840103 | METHODS FOR DETERMINING FRACTION OF FETAL NUCLEIC ACIDS IN MATERNAL SAMPLES | April 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 51 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16648885 | NON-INTEGRATING DNA VECTORS FOR THE GENETIC MODIFICATION OF CELLS | March 2020 | June 2023 | Abandon | 39 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16432177 | CIRCULAR RNA FOR TRANSLATION IN EUKARYOTIC CELLS | June 2019 | December 2023 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 14786637 | METHOD FOR A CELL-BASED DRUG SCREENING ASSAY AND THE USE THEREOF | October 2015 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 11 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE.
With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.
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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.
⚠ Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE works in Art Unit 1636 and has examined 28 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 50.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 45 months.
Examiner DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE's allowance rate of 50.0% places them in the 7% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE receive 1.82 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 56% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE is 45 months. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +42.4% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DACE DENITO, ALEXANDRA GERALDINE. This interview benefit is in the 91% 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, 15.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 6% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 55.6% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 77% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.
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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 11% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 82% 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'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.