USPTO Examiner WEIDNER ADAM M - Art Unit 1651

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17100674COMBINATION THERAPY OF COENZYME Q10 AND RADIATION FOR TREATMENT OF GLIOMANovember 2020May 2025Abandon5440NoNo
17079553NMDA ANTAGONIST PRODRUGSOctober 2020December 2023Allow3830NoNo
15518069ANTI-TAU ANTIBODY AND USES THEREOFApril 2017May 2018Allow2410YesNo
15389286HUMANIZED ANTI-TAU(PS422) ANTIBODIES AND METHODS OF USEDecember 2016November 2018Allow2321YesNo
15306466SYNTHETIC HAPTEN CARRIER COMPOSITIONS AND METHODSOctober 2016June 2018Allow2010YesNo
15266812PCSK9 VACCINESeptember 2016February 2018Allow1710YesNo
15246232PEPTIDE-MEDIATED DELIVERY OF IMMUNOGLOBULINS ACROSS THE BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIERAugust 2016May 2018Allow2010NoNo
15111248NOVEL LIGANDS FOR PREVENTION OF NEUROTOXICITY OF THE ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RELATED AMYLOID-BETA PEPTIDEJuly 2016March 2018Allow2010NoNo
15180031MODIFIED KISSPEPTIN PEPTIDES AND USES THEREOFJune 2016June 2018Allow2430YesNo
15099860BRAIN PERMEANT PEPTIDOMIMETIC BETA-SECRETASE 1 INHIBITORS FOR THE TREATMENT OR PROPHYLAXIS OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS OR CONDITIONSApril 2016November 2017Allow1911NoNo
15090328PROTOXIN-II VARIANTS AND METHODS OF USEApril 2016December 2018Allow3241YesNo
14890292COMPOUNDS SUITABLE FOR THE TREATMENT OF MYELOPROLIFERATIVE NEOPLASMS AS WELL AS METHODS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS/PROGNOSIS OF MYELOPROLIFERATIVE NEOPLASMSNovember 2015November 2018Allow3721YesNo
14929449USE OF THE PAT NONAPEPTIDE IN THE TREATMENT AND PREVENTION OF NEURODEGENERATIVE DISEASESNovember 2015June 2016Allow810YesNo
14822711MODULATION OF AXON DEGENERATIONAugust 2015November 2017Allow2811NoNo
14648834CYCLIC PEPTIDE AND PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCT CONTAINING SAMEJune 2015April 2017Allow2310NoNo
14508977PCSK9 VACCINEOctober 2014June 2016Allow2011YesNo
14384685MODIFIED KISSPEPTIN PEPTIDES AND USES THEREOFSeptember 2014March 2016Allow1810YesNo
14302992NEUROPROTECTION BY HEPATIC CELLS AND HEPATOCYTE SECRETORY FACTORSJune 2014April 2015Allow1010YesNo
14118988COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING NEURONAL EXCITATIONMarch 2014June 2016Allow3111NoNo
14103893Compounds as antagonists or inverse agonists of opioid receptors for treatment of addictionDecember 2013April 2014Allow400NoNo
13936084Use of DR6 and p75 Antagonists to Promote Survival of Cells of the Nervous SystemJuly 2013July 2014Allow1311YesNo
13809805USE OF THE PAT NANOPEPTIDE IN TREATING AND PREVENTING NEURODEGENERATIVE DISEASESJanuary 2013July 2015Allow3030YesNo
13601034Methods for Altering MRNA Splicing and Treating Familial Dysautonomia by Administering Kinetin, Benzyladenine, and TocotrienolsAugust 2012January 2014Allow1611YesNo
13394068KLF FAMILY MEMBERS REGULATE INTRINSIC AXON REGENERATION ABILITYMay 2012August 2013Allow1710NoNo
13467661BIOMARKERS FOR THE DETECTION AND SCREENING OF DOWN SYNDROMEMay 2012July 2013Allow1410NoNo
13462965NEUROPROTECTION BY HEPATIC CELLS AND HEPATOCYTE SECRETORY FACTORSMay 2012February 2014Allow2111YesNo
13458609ANTIBODIES SELECTIVE FOR PATHOLOGICAL TAU DIMERS AND PREFIBRILLAR PATHOLOGICAL TAU OLIGOMERS AND THEIR USES IN TREATMENT, DIAGNOSIS AND MONITORING OF TAUOPATHIESApril 2012October 2013Allow1810NoNo
13441879Methods of neuroprotection involving macrophage colony stimulating factor receptor agonistsApril 2012December 2014Abandon3230YesNo
13406289MODULATING NEUROMUSCULAR JUNCTION DENSITY CHANGES IN BOTULINUM-TOXIN TREATED TISSUEFebruary 2012March 2014Allow2520YesNo
13131231Use of DR6 and p75 Antagonists to Promote Survival of Cells of the Nervous SystemFebruary 2012March 2013Allow2201NoNo
13265242INHIBITION OF PRION PROPAGATION BY RECEPTOR ASSOCIATED PROTEIN (RAP), ITS DERIVATIVES, MIMETICS AND SYNTHETIC PEPTIDESJanuary 2012April 2015Allow4250YesNo
12672013ATF4 INHIBITORS AND THEIR USE FOR NEURAL PROTECTION, REPAIR, REGENERATION, AND PLASTICITYAugust 2011January 2015Allow5921NoNo
13125333Modulation of Axon DegenerationJune 2011March 2015Allow4741YesNo
12733096METHOD OF SCREENING COMPOUNDS USING CALHM (FAM26C)February 2011December 2012Allow3401NoNo
12669776TISSUE KALLIKREIN FOR THE TREATMENT OF DISEASES ASSOCIATED WITH AMYLOID PROTEINMay 2010March 2013Allow3811NoNo
12776920LEUKEMIC CELL CNS INFILTRATION CONTROLLED BY NOTCH-INDUCED CHEMOTAXISMay 2010March 2015Allow5931YesNo
12376580NOVEL COMPOUNDS AS ANTAGONISTS OR INVERSE AGONISTS AT OPIOID RECEPTORSFebruary 2009September 2013Allow5621NoNo
11792758Methods and Compositions for Monitoring Progression Of Huntington's DiseaseMay 2008June 2013Allow6030NoNo
11955490PREPARATION AND APPLICATION OF BIODEGRADABLE-MATERIAL-MADE MICROSPHERE VASCULAR EMBOLUS CONTAINING LIPOSOME-ENCAPSULATED CYTOKINESDecember 2007March 2013Allow6051YesNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner WEIDNER, ADAM M - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner WEIDNER, ADAM M works in Art Unit 1651 and has examined 39 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 94.9%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 24 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner WEIDNER, ADAM M's allowance rate of 94.9% places them in the 83% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by WEIDNER, ADAM M receive 1.79 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 37% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by WEIDNER, ADAM M is 24 months. This places the examiner in the 80% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by WEIDNER, ADAM M. This interview benefit is in the 20% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 30.6% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 63% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 55.6% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 82% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 44% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

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 5.4% of allowed cases (in the 83% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

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.