Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17097350 | Placental Tissue Particulate Compositions and Methods of Use | November 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17088860 | ICE-FREE VITRIFICATION AND NANO WARMING OF LARGE TISSUE SAMPLES | November 2020 | June 2025 | Allow | 55 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17050698 | METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS OF CYTOTOXIC T CELL DEPLETION | October 2020 | June 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 16937210 | METHODS FOR DETECTING RISK OF HAVING A BLOODSTREAM INFECTION AND COMPOSITIONS FOR REDUCING THE RISK | July 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 16923289 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR PRESERVING ORGAN TRANSPLANTS | July 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16957860 | CARDIOSPHERE-DERIVED CELL SHEET AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING THE SAME | June 2020 | December 2024 | Allow | 54 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16957525 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR STIMULATION OF CELLS FOR TISSUE REPAIR | June 2020 | December 2024 | Abandon | 54 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 16763023 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING CULTURED CELL, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THERAPEUTIC AGENT FOR SPINAL CORD INJURY DISEASE | May 2020 | February 2023 | Abandon | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16636592 | LOW-TEMPERATURE DAMAGE-RELIEVING AGENT OR NECROSIS INHIBITOR, AND METHOD FOR PRESERVING LIVING ORGANISM, TISSUE OR CELL | February 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 55 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16731911 | COMPOSITION DERIVED FROM MAMMALIAN UMBILICAL CORD AND WHARTONS JELLY FOR USE IN THERAPEUTIC AND REGENERATIVE APPLICATIONS | December 2019 | March 2024 | Allow | 51 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16625937 | METHODS FOR PRODUCING TRANSPLANTABLE CARTILAGE TISSUE | December 2019 | March 2025 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16622457 | HIGH SUBZERO CRYOPRESERVATION | December 2019 | March 2024 | Allow | 51 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16620091 | Improved Methods of Cell Culture | December 2019 | March 2024 | Allow | 51 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16685761 | HEPATOCYTES AND HEPATIC NON-PARENCHYMAL CELLS, AND METHODS FOR PREPARATION THEREOF | November 2019 | June 2024 | Allow | 55 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16664334 | COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING INSECTS AND MICROORGANISMS USING PSEUDOMONAS TAIWANENSIS | October 2019 | August 2024 | Abandon | 58 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16603609 | MULTI DONOR STEM CELL COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF MAKING SAME | October 2019 | February 2025 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16490812 | CULTURE MEDIUM COMPRISING DIPEPTIDES | September 2019 | September 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 16551998 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR THAWING CELLS USING MAGNETIC PARTICLES | August 2019 | March 2024 | Allow | 55 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16488253 | MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS OBTAINED FROM WHARTON'S JELLY FOR THE TREATMENT OF SEPSIS | August 2019 | December 2023 | Allow | 52 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16385543 | CHEMICALLY DEFINED DIFFERENTIATION PROTOCOL FOR PERICYTE DIFFERENTIATION FROM PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS | April 2019 | May 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16331718 | METHODS RELATING TO INTESTINAL ORGAN-ON-A-CHIP | March 2019 | July 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16318155 | CULTURE MEDIA FOR CULTURING PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS IN SUSPENSION | January 2019 | September 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16229823 | HUMAN TISSUE DERIVED COMPOSITIONS AND USES THEREOF | December 2018 | August 2024 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16227094 | PATHOGEN REDUCED PLATELET COMPOSITIONS AND RELATED METHODS | December 2018 | September 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 15758255 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING RETINAL TISSUE | March 2018 | May 2025 | Allow | 60 | 10 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 15912473 | COLOROMETRIC SENSOR FOR THE NON-INVASIVE SCREENING OF GLUCOSE IN SWEAT IN PRE AND TYPE 2 DIABETES | March 2018 | January 2024 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 15907695 | DETECTION OF DRUG RESISTANCE OF MICROORGANISMS | February 2018 | March 2024 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 15534547 | USE OF CLOSTRIDIUM HISTOLYTICUM PROTEASE MIXTURE IN PROMOTING WOUND HEALING | June 2017 | November 2023 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 15528998 | HAY PRESERVATIVE AND METHODS FOR PRESERVATION OF HAY | May 2017 | October 2023 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 15091310 | Method and Device for Activating Stem Cells | April 2016 | July 2019 | Allow | 40 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14991653 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR STUDYING INFLAMMATION-DRUG INTERACTIONS | January 2016 | May 2019 | Abandon | 40 | 4 | 3 | No | Yes |
| 14583838 | RETINAL PIGMENT EPITHELIAL CELLS DIFFERENTIATED FROM EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS WITH NICOTINAMIDE AND ACTIVIN A | December 2014 | June 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14056101 | THERAPEUTIC PRODUCTS COMPRISING VITALIZED PLACENTAL DISPERSIONS | October 2013 | January 2024 | Allow | 60 | 11 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner VAN BUREN, LAUREN K.
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.
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, 57.1% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
✓ 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 VAN BUREN, LAUREN K works in Art Unit 1638 and has examined 33 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 69.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 55 months.
Examiner VAN BUREN, LAUREN K's allowance rate of 69.7% places them in the 33% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by VAN BUREN, LAUREN K receive 4.52 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 98% 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by VAN BUREN, LAUREN K is 55 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +75.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by VAN BUREN, LAUREN K. This interview benefit is in the 99% 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, 16.2% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 15% 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 26.1% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 37% 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, 100.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 71% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 71.4% of appeals filed. This is in the 58% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 20.0% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 90% 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.