Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17257294 | Novel CD47 Antibodies and Methods of Using Same | December 2020 | December 2023 | Abandon | 36 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17127629 | MESOTHELIN-TARGETED CD40 AGONISTIC MULTISPECIFIC ANTIBODY CONSTRUCTS FOR THE TREATMENT OF SOLID TUMORS | December 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17125734 | ILT3-BINDING AGENTS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | December 2020 | April 2023 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17125108 | DOSING REGIMENS FOR TARGETED TGF-B INHIBITION FOR USE IN TREATING BILIARY TRACT CANCER | December 2020 | January 2024 | Abandon | 37 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17043054 | SINGLE-DOMAIN ANTIBODIES AGAINST LAG-3 AND USES THEREOF | December 2020 | January 2024 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17251411 | ANTIBODY CAPABLE OF BLOCKING CD47-SIRPA INTERACTION AND APPLICATION THEREOF | December 2020 | July 2023 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17077041 | ENGINEERED THERAPEUTIC TO ENHANCE CYTOTOXIC ACTIVITY AND PHAGOCYTOSIS IN TUMOR ASSOCIATED MACROPHAGES | October 2020 | June 2023 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17049435 | COMBINATION OF METFORMIN AND CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE AS AN ADJUVANT IN CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY | October 2020 | January 2024 | Abandon | 38 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17072549 | MULTISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES AND USE THEREOF | October 2020 | August 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17047649 | ANTIBODIES BINDING PD-1 AND USES THEREOF | October 2020 | March 2024 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17046265 | ANTI-PD-L1 ANTIBODY AND USE THEREOF | October 2020 | January 2024 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17043371 | LONG-ACTING PROTEIN CONJUGATES FOR BRAIN TARGETING, A PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF, AND A COMPOSITION COMPRISING THE SAME | September 2020 | August 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16769790 | COMBINATION THERAPY OF MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS COMPRISING A CD20 LIGAND | June 2020 | August 2023 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16636947 | CD96-BINDING AGENTS AS IMMUNOMODULATORS | February 2020 | December 2023 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16582034 | TREATMENT OF MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS AND NEUROMYELITIS OPTICA | September 2019 | February 2024 | Allow | 53 | 5 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16491277 | CTLA4 ANTIBODY, PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION AND USE THEREOF | September 2019 | June 2023 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16311708 | MEANS AND METHODS FOR TREATING PARKINSON'S DISEASE | December 2018 | June 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 16093251 | AMYLOSPHEROID (ASPD)-LIKE STRUCTURE AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION | October 2018 | April 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BENAVIDES, JENNIFER ANN.
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 BENAVIDES, JENNIFER ANN works in Art Unit 1649 and has examined 18 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 38.9%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 39 months.
Examiner BENAVIDES, JENNIFER ANN's allowance rate of 38.9% places them in the 7% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by BENAVIDES, JENNIFER ANN receive 1.39 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 19% 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 BENAVIDES, JENNIFER ANN is 39 months. This places the examiner in the 25% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +84.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BENAVIDES, JENNIFER ANN. 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, 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 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 86% percentile among all examiners. 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, 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.