Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17139787 | Novel methods for the in vitro processing of cancer cells from one individual to accurately preserve the antigenic architecture of multiple surface abnormalities specific to the individual cancer and for rapidly selecting and amplifying anti-cancer molecules highly specific for cancer stem cells and other abnormalities regardless of their rarity while minimizing collateral damage to normal tissue associated with less specific therapies | December 2020 | October 2023 | Abandon | 33 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17136433 | COMBINATION THERAPY WITH TARGETED TGF-B INHIBITION FOR TREATMENT OF ADVANCED NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER | December 2020 | January 2024 | Abandon | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17116244 | PEPTIDE SUPPRESSING BINDING OF CTLA4 TO B7 PROTEINS, AND USE THEREOF | December 2020 | June 2023 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16972788 | ANTIBODIES TO PROGRAMMED DEATH LIGAND (PD-L1) AND APPLICATION THEREOF | December 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17049393 | IMMUNE EFFECTOR CELLS AND MOLECULAR ADAPTORS WITH AN ANTIGEN CYTOKINE COMPLEX FOR EFFECTIVE IMMUNOTHERAPY | October 2020 | June 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17047130 | METHODS OF PREVENTING OR TREATING NON-HEMATOPOIETIC SLAMF7 POSITIVE AND SLAMF7 NEGATIVE CANCERS | October 2020 | October 2023 | Abandon | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17045285 | ANTIBODIES BINDING TO HUMAN IL-4R, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND USE THEREOF | October 2020 | April 2023 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17040240 | DUAL SPECIFICITY ANTIBODIES TO HUMAN PD-L1 AND PD-L2 AND METHODS OF USE THEREFOR | September 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17022465 | ANTI-STEM CELL FACTOR ANTIBODIES AND METHODS OF BLOCKING THE INTERACTION BETWEEN SCF AND c-KIT | September 2020 | June 2022 | Allow | 20 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16969805 | CHIMERIC TRANSMEMBRANE RECEPTORS AND USES THEREOF | August 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 16967065 | METHODS OF SELECTING AND DESIGNING SAFER AND MORE EFFECTIVE ANTI-CTLA-4 ANTIBODIES FOR CANCER THERAPY | August 2020 | March 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 16932941 | NOVEL PHARMACOLOGICAL THERAPY FOR NEURONOPATHIC GAUCHER DISEASE | July 2020 | February 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16958240 | Biomarkers for Typing Allograft Recipients | June 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 48 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16956107 | MULTIVALENT CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR | June 2020 | August 2023 | Abandon | 38 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16498784 | THERAPEUTIC AGENTS AND METHODS FOR ENHANCING IMMUNE RESPONSES IN TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT | September 2019 | February 2024 | Allow | 53 | 3 | 2 | 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 MIDDLETON, DANAYA L works in Art Unit 1646 and has examined 15 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 33.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.
Examiner MIDDLETON, DANAYA L's allowance rate of 33.3% places them in the 6% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by MIDDLETON, DANAYA L receive 1.47 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 22% 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 MIDDLETON, DANAYA L is 41 months. This places the examiner in the 20% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +70.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MIDDLETON, DANAYA L. This interview benefit is in the 98% 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, 0.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 0% 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 66.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 90% 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 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 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.