Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18425327 | MULTIPLE LAMP PRIMER SET, DETECTION METHOD, AND KIT FOR SIMULTANEOUS DETECTION OF MULTIPLE PATHOGENS | January 2024 | August 2024 | Allow | 6 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18283172 | SPATIAL MAPPING BY SERIAL PRIMER EXTENSION | September 2023 | August 2024 | Allow | 11 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17525748 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS COMPRISING ASYMMETRIC BARCODING | November 2021 | January 2024 | Allow | 26 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17368259 | SPATIAL ANALYSIS UTILIZING DEGRADABLE HYDROGELS | July 2021 | February 2024 | Allow | 32 | 0 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17338031 | METHODS OF ENHANCING SPATIAL RESOLUTION OF TRANSCRIPTS | June 2021 | March 2024 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17280729 | METHODS FOR DETECTION OF MICROBIAL NUCLEIC ACIDS IN BODY FLUIDS | March 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17280110 | CONTROL OF COLEOPTERAN INSECTS | March 2021 | July 2024 | Abandon | 40 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17274955 | Method for Detecting Liver Diseases | March 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner HORTH, LISA ANNE works in Art Unit 1637 and has examined 7 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 57.1%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 33 months.
Examiner HORTH, LISA ANNE's allowance rate of 57.1% places them in the 11% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by HORTH, LISA ANNE receive 0.43 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by HORTH, LISA ANNE is 33 months. This places the examiner in the 26% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +50.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HORTH, LISA ANNE. This interview benefit is in the 94% 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, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.
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.