USPTO Examiner RADOSAVLJEVIC ALEKSANDAR - Art Unit 1662

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18783627USE OF MTNAC33 GENE AND AN ENCODED PROTEIN THEREBY IN IMPROVING THE BIOMASS AND DROUGHT TOLERANCE OF MEDICAGO SATIVA L.July 2024December 2024Allow510NoNo
18155210TBRFV RESISTANT TOMATO PLANTJanuary 2023April 2025Allow2600NoNo
18072683Plants and Seeds of Corn Variety CV553006November 2022March 2025Allow2810NoNo
17979734SOYBEAN VARIETY 01093524November 2022January 2025Allow2610NoNo
17974059RICE CULTIVAR 'AROMA 22'October 2022April 2025Allow3010NoNo
17995648METHOD FOR PRODUCING AVENANTHRAMIDE-RICH OATS USING ACTIVE ELICITORSOctober 2022May 2025Allow3130NoNo
17954827SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 13380227September 2022January 2025Allow2810NoNo
17954769SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 12070855September 2022January 2025Allow2810NoNo
17951343SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 19390713September 2022January 2025Allow2810NoNo
17951327SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 10170604September 2022November 2024Allow2610NoNo
17949680SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 13323023September 2022January 2025Allow2810NoNo
17949590SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 12350011September 2022January 2025Allow2810NoNo
17946378SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 17230739September 2022November 2024Allow2610NoNo
17932430CANOLA INBRED 4PQEY54ASeptember 2022March 2025Allow3020NoNo
17932519CANOLA INBRED 4PYYM82ASeptember 2022April 2025Allow3110NoNo
17943899SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 18330107September 2022October 2024Allow2510NoNo
17941636SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 16030115September 2022November 2024Allow2610NoNo
17939738SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 16450023September 2022August 2024Allow2310NoNo
17939911PEPPER HYBRID SVPS9064 AND PARENTS THEREOFSeptember 2022September 2024Allow2410NoNo
17891812PEPPER HYBRID SVPB9514 AND PARENTS THEREOFAugust 2022September 2024Allow2510NoNo
17808581MAIZE HYBRID X13V198June 2022January 2025Allow3110YesNo
17807628MAIZE INBRED 1PMSZ41June 2022March 2025Allow3320NoNo
17807562MAIZE INBRED 1PLRC84June 2022March 2025Allow3330NoNo
17807591MAIZE INBRED 1PWFK43June 2022January 2025Allow3110NoNo
17807415MAIZE INBRED 1PWDE32June 2022January 2025Allow3120NoNo
17831509STSCI PROTEIN FOR CHANGING SELF-INCOMPATIBILITY OF DIPLOID POTATO MATERIALSJune 2022May 2025Allow3620YesNo
17779355ROP - DEFICIENT PLANTS HAVING HIGH WATER USE EFFICIENCYMay 2022December 2024Allow3010YesNo
17729926INBRED RICE LINE DG263LApril 2022June 2024Allow2610YesNo
17723806BARLEY MALE STERILITY GENE HVMSG47 AND USE THEREOFApril 2022June 2024Allow2620YesNo
17754973GENOMIC ALTERATION OF PLANT GERMLINEApril 2022April 2025Allow3611NoNo
17641791TOMATO PLANTS HAVING FRUIT WITH HIGH ZEAXANTHIN CONTENTMarch 2022November 2024Abandon3201NoNo
17564650WHEAT CULTIVAR 01095217December 2021March 2024Allow2710NoNo
17617027COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING PLANT PESTSDecember 2021April 2024Abandon2811NoNo
17616276CONTROL OF SPODOPTERADecember 2021June 2024Allow3020YesNo
17457138Engineering, production and characterization of plant produced Nucleocapsid and Spike structural proteins of SARS CoV 2 as vaccine candidates against COVID19December 2021August 2024Abandon3201NoNo
17528375RECOMBINANT LAC POLYNUCLEOTIDES AND USES THEREOF TO INCREASE PRODUCTION OF C-LIGNIN IN PLANTSNovember 2021December 2023Allow2520NoNo
17528520Plants and Seeds of Hybrid Corn Variety CH011203November 2021February 2024Allow2710NoNo
17595447ABIOTIC STRESS TOLERANT PLANTS AND METHODSNovember 2021January 2024Allow2611NoNo
17595442ABIOTIC STRESS TOLERANT PLANTS AND METHODSNovember 2021January 2024Allow2611NoNo
17454315PLANT DERIVED INSECTICIDAL PROTEINS AND METHODS FOR THEIR USENovember 2021November 2024Abandon3611NoNo
17510525Plants and Seeds of Hybrid Corn Variety CH011160October 2021February 2024Allow2710NoNo
17451913LEGHEMOGLOBIN IN SOYBEANOctober 2021June 2023Abandon2010NoNo
17507445Plants and Seeds of Corn Variety CV381120October 2021April 2024Allow3010NoNo
17506337Plants and Seeds of Hybrid Corn Variety CH011231October 2021April 2024Allow3010NoNo
17594475MODIFIED PLANTS COMPRISING A POLYNUCLEOTIDE COMPRISING A NON-COGNATE PROMOTER OPERABLY LINKED TO A CODING SEQUENCE THAT ENCODES A TRANSCRIPTION FACTOROctober 2021August 2024Allow3420NoNo
17499864Rice thermo-sensitive male sterile gene mutant tms18 and uses thereofOctober 2021July 2023Allow2110NoNo
17601579STEVIA PLANT HAVING LESS ABILITY TO FORM FLOWER BUDSOctober 2021February 2025Allow4111NoNo
17442179LOW-METHANE RICESeptember 2021April 2025Abandon4231NoNo
17441509Modulation of Transgene ExpressionSeptember 2021December 2023Abandon2711NoNo
17437973PESTICIDAL GENES AND METHODS OF USESeptember 2021November 2024Allow3831YesNo
17437259Expression of Nitrogenase Polypeptides In Plant CellsSeptember 2021May 2025Allow4421NoNo
17458916GRAIN PRODUCTION WITH MALE-STERILE FEMALE PLANTSAugust 2021August 2023Allow2410NoNo
17432264ENGINEERED PESTICIDAL PROTEINS AND METHODS OF CONTROLLING PLANT PESTSAugust 2021July 2024Allow3511NoNo
17429674GENE FOR RESISTANCE TO PLANT DISEASEAugust 2021May 2024Allow3321NoNo
17429176NEW GENE RESPONSIBLE FOR CYTOPLASMIC MALE STERILITYAugust 2021October 2024Allow3821YesYes
17392841OSNF-YA5 GENE FROM ORYZA SATIVA FOR INCREASING NITROGEN AVAILABILITY OF PLANT AND USES THEREOFAugust 2021April 2023Allow2010NoNo
17427570METHOD FOR IMPROVING RICE YIELD AND/OR RICE BLAST RESISTANCE AND PROTEIN USED THEREOFJuly 2021March 2023Allow2010NoNo
17417982LOW-TYRAMINE STEVIA PLANTJune 2021April 2025Abandon4511NoNo
17336525Pleiotropic Gene that Increases Biomass and Sugar Yield in Sorghum and SugarcaneJune 2021February 2025Abandon4530NoNo
17289335INSECTICIDAL PROTEINSApril 2021February 2024Abandon3301NoNo
17286173GENOME EDITING TO INCREASE SEED PROTEIN CONTENTApril 2021May 2025Abandon4921YesNo
17205889Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) Markers for SteviaMarch 2021January 2024Allow3420YesNo
17200258PLANTS COMPRISING WHEAT G-TYPE CYTOPLASMIC MALE STERILITY RESTORER GENES, MOLECULAR MARKERS AND USES THEREOFMarch 2021April 2025Allow4921YesNo
17273159GENETICALLY ENGINEERED LAND PLANTS THAT EXPRESS AN INCREASED SEED YIELD PROTEIN AND/OR AN INCREASED SEED YIELD RNAMarch 2021May 2024Allow3811NoNo
17188144GENERATION OF BIOMASSMarch 2021November 2024Abandon4411NoNo
17180195MODIFIED FORM OF OLEOSIN THAT WHEN EXPRESSED IN PLANTS LEADS TO INCREASED TRIACYLGLYCEROL (OIL) ACCUMULATIONFebruary 2021May 2025Allow5131YesNo
17266730MOLECULAR MARKERS FOR BLACKLEG RESISTANCE GENE RLM7 IN BRASSICA NAPUS, AND METHODS OF USING THE SAMEFebruary 2021September 2024Allow4311NoNo
17250303CANNABIS VARIETY WHICH PRODUCES GREATER THAN 50% FEMALE PLANTSDecember 2020April 2024Allow4011YesNo
17252220SEX IDENTIFICATION OF CANNABIS PLANTSDecember 2020April 2024Abandon4120NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
95.5%
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, 100.0% 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

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

Examiner RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR works in Art Unit 1662 and has examined 68 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 80.9%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 30 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR's allowance rate of 80.9% places them in the 45% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR receive 1.34 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 27% 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 RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR is 30 months. This places the examiner in the 39% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +14.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RADOSAVLJEVIC, ALEKSANDAR. This interview benefit is in the 56% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 81.8% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 96% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 85% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 82% 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:

  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

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.