Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18755160 | mRNA Capping Enzyme And Methods of Use Thereof | June 2024 | July 2025 | Abandon | 12 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 18524856 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR INCREASED PROTEIN PRODUCTION IN BACILLUS LICHENIFORMIS | November 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18504952 | SINGLE-VECTOR TYPE I VECTORS | November 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16500637 | METHOD FOR QUANTITATIVELY CONTROLLING PLASMID COPY NUMBER IN ANTIBIOTIC-FREE PLASMID MAINTENANCE SYSTEM | October 2023 | January 2025 | Allow | 60 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18485615 | Methods of Detecting Bladder Cancer | October 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18463589 | TARGETED NON-VIRAL DNA INSERTIONS | September 2023 | October 2024 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18352347 | CONSTRUCTS FOR CONTINUOUS MONITORING OF LIVE CELLS | July 2023 | October 2024 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18330356 | ARTIFICIAL NUCLEIC ACID MOLECULES FOR IMPROVED PROTEIN EXPRESSION | June 2023 | January 2025 | Allow | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18178275 | MODIFIED STRAINS FOR IMPROVED SECRETION OF RECOMBINANT PROTEINS | March 2023 | December 2024 | Allow | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18174294 | Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 Nucleases with Altered PAM Specificity | February 2023 | October 2024 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17780002 | CONSTRUCTS, COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS THEREOF HAVING IMPROVED GENOME EDITING EFFICIENCY AND SPECIFICITY | May 2022 | November 2024 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17660523 | Nuclease-Independent Targeted Gene Editing Platform and Uses Thereof | April 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 28 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17392827 | ALTERING MICROBIAL POPULATIONS & MODIFYING MICROBIOTA | August 2021 | June 2025 | Allow | 46 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17414292 | METHOD FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF GENETIC INFORMATION IN CELL BY SITE-SPECIFIC INTEGRATION SYSTEM | June 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 45 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17213796 | NOVEL ANUCLEATED CELLS FOR THE TREATMENT OF DISEASES | March 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17266882 | NOVEL CRISPR-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN AND USE THEREOF | February 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17157708 | Unconstrained Genome Targeting with near-PAMless Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 Variants | January 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17157805 | CRISPR-CAS ENZYMES WITH ENHANCED ON-TARGET ACTIVITY | January 2021 | November 2024 | Allow | 46 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17258893 | BACTERIAL CONJUGATIVE SYSTEM AND THERAPEUTIC USES THEREOF | January 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17254169 | TYPE I CRISPR SYSTEM AS A TOOL FOR GENOME EDITING | December 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17051632 | MICROHOMOLOGY MEDIATED REPAIR OF MICRODUPLICATION GENE MUTATIONS | October 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 52 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16976518 | YEAST WITH IMPROVED ALCOHOL PRODUCTION UNDER HIGH DISSOLVED SOLIDS CONDITIONS | August 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 47 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16969676 | METHOD FOR DIAGNOSIS OF STROKE THROUGH BACTERIAL METAGENOME ANALYSIS | August 2020 | December 2024 | Abandon | 52 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16956942 | TARGETED INTEGRATION OF NUCLEIC ACIDS | June 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 48 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16806197 | METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING CRISPR-CPF1 AND PAIRED GUIDE CRISPR RNAS FOR PROGRAMMABLE GENOMIC DELETIONS | March 2020 | May 2025 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16629883 | GENE EDITING SYSTEM FOR CORRECTING SPLICING DEFECTS | January 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16711011 | COMPOSITIONS OF SELF-REPORTING TRANSPOSON (SRT) CONSTRUCTS AND METHODS FOR MAPPING TRANSPOSON INSERTIONS | December 2019 | August 2024 | Allow | 56 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16695487 | MUTANT HUMAN ESTROGEN RECEPTOR-ALPHA AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | November 2019 | June 2024 | Allow | 55 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16591445 | ENGINEERED GENETIC MODULATORS | October 2019 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16588842 | ALTERING MICROBIAL POPULATIONS & MODIFYING MICROBIOTA | September 2019 | October 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16352462 | METHODS OF HOST CELL MODIFICATION | March 2019 | March 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16318787 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR RAPID CLONING OF T-CELL RECEPTORS | January 2019 | December 2024 | Allow | 60 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16081292 | Improved Promoters And Compositions | August 2018 | April 2025 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 15569920 | GENE THERAPY FOR AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT DISEASES | October 2017 | July 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner GROOMS, TIFFANY NICOLE.
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.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner GROOMS, TIFFANY NICOLE works in Art Unit 1637 and has examined 33 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 72.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 48 months.
Examiner GROOMS, TIFFANY NICOLE's allowance rate of 72.7% places them in the 28% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by GROOMS, TIFFANY NICOLE receive 2.09 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 70% 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 GROOMS, TIFFANY NICOLE is 48 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.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +54.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by GROOMS, TIFFANY NICOLE. 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 28.6% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 42% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 41% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 85% 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 frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 96% 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.