Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17251537 | METHOD FOR CULTURING COLORECTAL CANCER SOLID TUMOR PRIMARY CELLS AND COLORECTAL CANCER ASCITES PRIMARY TUMOR CELLS AND SUPPORTING REAGENTS | June 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 52 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17255618 | IN VIVO CONTROLLED COMBINATION THERAPY FOR TREATMENT OF CANCER | December 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17102456 | ANTI-TUMOR COMPOSITION COMPRISING GM-CSF GENE, Flt3L-TRAIL FUSION GENE, shRNA INHIBITING TGF-� EXPRESSION, AND shRNA INHIBITING HSP EXPRESSION | November 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17055328 | METHODS FOR TISSUE DECELLULARIZATION | November 2020 | October 2024 | Allow | 47 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17055441 | COMPOSITION FOR PROMOTING STEM CELL DIFFERENTIATION, COMPRISING PROGENITOR CELL CULTURE SOLUTION AND MULTILAYER GRAPHENE FILM, AND USE THEREOF | November 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 44 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17054633 | METHOD OF DIFFERENTIATION OF HUMAN PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS TO MONOHORMONAL CELLS | November 2020 | May 2025 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17054760 | GENE-DRIVE IN DNA VIRUSES | November 2020 | February 2025 | Allow | 51 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17089284 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR MODIFYING REGULATORY T CELLS | November 2020 | September 2024 | Abandon | 47 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17087614 | COMPOSITION FOR IMPROVING SKIN CONDITIONS COMPRISING A FRAGMENT OF HUMAN HEAT SHOCK PROTEIN 90A AS AN ACTIVE INGREDIENT | November 2020 | March 2024 | Abandon | 40 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17066642 | MESENCHYMAL-LIKE STEM CELLS DERIVED FROM HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS, METHODS AND USES THEREOF | October 2020 | September 2024 | Abandon | 47 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17065101 | Methods and Compositions for A HIV Based Delivery System | October 2020 | March 2024 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17061360 | METHOD OF CULTURING CELLS, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING CELL SUPPORT COMPOSITE, CULTURED CELLS, AND CELL SUPPORT COMPOSITE | October 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17041788 | NOVEL DIFFERENTIATION TECHNIQUE TO GENERATE DOPAMINERGIC NEURONS FROM INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS | September 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16982691 | METHODS OF USE OF ISLET CELLS | September 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 46 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16979981 | METHOD FOR PREPARING 3D BRAIN ORGANOIDS | September 2020 | October 2024 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17012486 | MOBILE-CRISPRI PLASMIDS AND RELATED METHODS | September 2020 | January 2024 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16968451 | CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTORS FOR TREATMENT OF NEURODEGENERATIVE DISEASES AND DISORDERS | August 2020 | February 2025 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16962190 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING INSULIN-PRODUCING CELLS | July 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 43 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15733108 | Genome Edited iPSC-Derived Monocytes Expressing Trophic Factors | May 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 15930984 | STERILIZED TISSUE PRODUCTS AND RELATED METHODS | May 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 54 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 16759705 | PLATFORM ONCOLYTIC VECTOR FOR SYSTEMIC DELIVERY | April 2020 | April 2024 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 16614297 | MULTIPLEX ASSAY | November 2019 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16494482 | IMMUNOMODULATING CELL CIRCUITS | September 2019 | February 2024 | Abandon | 53 | 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 ROGERS, ERIC JASON works in Art Unit 1638 and has examined 23 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 60.9%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 47 months.
Examiner ROGERS, ERIC JASON's allowance rate of 60.9% places them in the 22% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by ROGERS, ERIC JASON receive 1.70 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 32% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ROGERS, ERIC JASON is 47 months. This places the examiner in the 10% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +40.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ROGERS, ERIC JASON. This interview benefit is in the 87% 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, 26.1% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 45% 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 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 97% 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 2% 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 2% 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.