USPTO Examiner MARTIN RACHEL E - Art Unit 1657

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18919965LACTOBACILLUS ACIDOPHILUS GOLDGUT-LA100 HAVING FUNCTIONS OF LIPID LOWERING, BLOOD GLUCOSE LOWERING AND WEIGHT LOSS AND APPLICATION THEREOFOctober 2024June 2025Allow820NoNo
18915656EVOLVED INTEGRASES AND METHODS OF USING THE SAME FOR GENOME EDITINGOctober 2024June 2025Allow821YesNo
18426195ESCHERICHIA COLI K-12 MG1655 BLBYZT6 AND APPLICATION THEREOFJanuary 2024March 2025Allow1440YesNo
18450812Anti-Fatigue Lactobacillus Composition and Use ThereofAugust 2023September 2024Abandon1311NoNo
18339218CUTINASE HAVING IMPROVED ENZYMATIC ACTIVITYJune 2023December 2023Allow600NoNo
18324416CELLULOSE SACCHARIFICATION METHODMay 2023October 2024Abandon1620NoNo
18135116METHOD OF PREPARING PROCOLLAGEN FROM FRESHWATER FISHApril 2023June 2025Abandon2630NoNo
18031556ENGINEERED MICROORGANISMS EXPRESSING ACETOACETYL- COA REDUCTASE VARIANTS AND METHODS FOR INCREASING PROPORTION OF 3-HYDROXYHEXANOIC ACID IN PHAApril 2023December 2024Allow2011YesNo
18186488LAMBDA-CARRAGEENASE MUTANT OUC-CGLA-DPQQ AND APPLICATION THEREOFMarch 2023January 2025Abandon2221NoNo
17972906HYPOOSMOTIC STABILIZER FOR GENOMIC DNA OF GUT MICROBIOTA, AND PREPARATION METHOD AND USE THEREOFOctober 2022May 2025Abandon3140NoNo
17919762A chimeric endolysin polypeptideOctober 2022October 2024Abandon2301NoNo
17753367ESCHERICHIA COLI-BASED RECOMBINANT STRAIN, CONSTRUCTION METHOD THEREFOR AND USE THEREOFFebruary 2022May 2025Allow3920YesNo
17638340DETERGENT COMPOSITIONFebruary 2022February 2025Abandon3610NoNo
17638118Recombinant Chorionic Gonadotropin, Procedure for Preparation, Pharmaceutical Compositions and Uses of the SameFebruary 2022April 2025Allow3820NoNo
17633991OPTIMIZED CULTURE MEDIA FOR CLOSTRIDIA BACTERIAFebruary 2022September 2024Abandon3110NoNo
17586930PROTEINS FOR STABILIZATION OF BIOLOGICAL MATERIALJanuary 2022May 2025Allow3921YesNo
17568085PLANT PROTEIN-FURFURYL ALCOHOL WOOD ADHESIVE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOFJanuary 2022January 2025Abandon3730YesNo
17565813CANDIDA UTILIS DOUBLE GENE CO-EXPRESSION STRAIN FOR HYDROLYZING PROTEIN COMPONENTS IN KITCHEN WASTE AND CONSTRUCTION METHOD THEREOFDecember 2021December 2024Abandon3610NoNo
17562081Multifunctional lactobacillus capable of relieving pfoa toxic effects and application thereofDecember 2021May 2025Allow4021YesNo
17418653GENE EXPRESSION CASSETTE FOR EXPRESSING N-TERMINAL METHIONINE-TRUNCATED PROTEIN OF INTEREST AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING N-TERMINAL METHIONINE-TRUNCATED PROTEIN OF INTEREST BY USING SAMEDecember 2021December 2024Abandon4110NoNo
17552103NAD(P) DEPOT FOR NAD(P)-DEPENDENT ENZYME-BASED SENSORSDecember 2021June 2025Allow4221YesNo
17616842OLIVETOLIC ACID CYCLASE VARIANTS AND METHODS FOR THEIR USEDecember 2021May 2025Abandon4101NoNo
17615556PROBIOTICS TO INHIBIT ENTERIC PATHOGENSNovember 2021August 2024Abandon3301NoNo
17610352COMPOSITION FOR PRODUCING GLUCOSYLATED STEVIOL GLYCOSIDE INCLUDING GLUCOSYLTRANSFERASE AND METHOD OF PRODUCING GLUCOSYLATED STEVIOL GLYCOSIDE USING THE SAMENovember 2021May 2025Allow4220YesNo
17608437KAURENOIC ACID 13-HYDROXYLASE (KAH) VARIANTS AND USES THEREOFNovember 2021March 2025Allow4111YesNo
17604630EXTREME THERMOPHILIC BACTERIA OF THE GENUS CALDICELLULOSIRUPTOR SUITABLE FOR THE CONVERSION OF CELLULOSIC AND STARCHY BIOMASSOctober 2021March 2025Allow4110YesNo
17603627METHOD AND PROCESS LINE FOR PRODUCING A DEWATERED GLUTEN-CONTAINING FRACTIONOctober 2021December 2024Abandon3801NoNo
17440303MODIFIED AGROBACTERIUM STRAINS AND USE THEREOF FOR PLANT TRANSFORMATIONSeptember 2021May 2025Allow4431YesNo
17432201RING NUCLEASEAugust 2021May 2025Abandon4520NoNo
17429111PIC1 VARIANTS WITH IMPROVED SOLUBILITY AND METHODS OF USING THE SAMEAugust 2021September 2024Abandon3701NoNo
17424761STRAIN FOR PRODUCING NATTOKINASE AND PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFORJuly 2021July 2024Allow3610YesNo
17376613USE OF GALACTURONATE AND OR GALACTURONATE POLYMERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH CARBOHYDRATES TO CONTROL METABOLIC STATE OF ORGANISMSJuly 2021November 2024Allow4020YesYes
17297931PURIFICATION METHOD FOR RECOMBINANT PROTEINS AND NANOPARTICLESMay 2021August 2024Abandon3810NoNo
17297850UOX-ALBUMIN CONJUGATE WITH CERTAIN NUMBERS OF ALBUMIN CONJUGATED THERETO, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOFMay 2021October 2024Abandon4111NoNo
17295847MICROBIAL CYTOMETRIC MOCK COMMUNITIES AND USE THEREOF AS STANDARD IN FLOW CYTOMETRYMay 2021July 2024Abandon3801NoNo
17323383HUMAN DNASE FOR LUNG DISEASEMay 2021January 2025Abandon4420NoNo
13582372MASS SPECTROMETRIC MEASUREMENT OF B-LACTAMASE RESISTANCESDecember 2012September 2020Abandon60131YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner MARTIN, RACHEL E.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
0.9%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(66.7%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(33.3%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
90.7%
Higher than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

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, 66.7% 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.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner MARTIN, RACHEL E - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MARTIN, RACHEL E works in Art Unit 1657 and has examined 34 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 38.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 38 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MARTIN, RACHEL E's allowance rate of 38.2% places them in the 3% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by MARTIN, RACHEL E receive 1.74 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MARTIN, RACHEL E is 38 months. This places the examiner in the 11% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +75.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MARTIN, RACHEL E. 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 10.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 2% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 42.9% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 58% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 92% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 42% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 50.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 96% 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 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 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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • Request pre-appeal conferences: PACs are highly effective with this examiner. Before filing a full appeal brief, request a PAC to potentially resolve issues without full PTAB review.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.