USPTO Examiner STUART CAREY ALEXANDER MC - Art Unit 1671

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18777836C-BASED SINGLE DOMAIN ANTIBODY FOR NEUTRALIZING RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL VIRUS AND APPLICATION THEREOFJuly 2024April 2025Allow910NoNo
18512036MULTIPLEXED NUCLEIC ACID DETECTION KIT FOR HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS (HPV) TYPING, AND DETECTION METHODNovember 2023August 2024Allow910NoNo
18277087Recombinant Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Rbd Trimer Protein Vaccine Capable Of Generating Broad-Spectrum Cross Neutralization Activity, and Preparation Method and Use ThereofAugust 2023April 2025Allow2020NoNo
18227747METHODS OF MANUFACTURING GENETICALLY-MODIFIED LYMPHOCYTESJuly 2023November 2024Abandon1610NoNo
17827320SYNTHETIC CHIMERIC POXVIRUSESMay 2022November 2024Allow2910NoNo
17737991ATTENUATING VIRAL MUTATIONS IN PROTEIN GENESMay 2022March 2025Allow3430NoNo
17717504RECOMBINANT RSV LIVE VACCINE STRAIN AND THE PREPARING METHOD THEREOFApril 2022February 2025Allow3420NoNo
17578049AMINO ACID SEQUENCE DERIVED FROM S PROTEIN OF SARS-COV2 FOR GENERATING AN ANTI-SARS -COV-2 ANTIBODYJanuary 2022March 2025Allow3730NoNo
17513538HIGH THROUGHPUT IMMUNOASSAYS AND METHODS FOR THE DETECTION OF SARS-COV-2 ANTIGENSOctober 2021November 2024Abandon3620NoNo
17593446A LIVE AND ATTENUATED FLAVIVIRUS COMPRISING A MUTATED M PROTEINSeptember 2021June 2025Abandon4510NoNo
17436782FILOVIRUS ANTIBODIES AND METHODSSeptember 2021December 2024Allow3910NoNo
17434489Multivalent Live-attenuated Influenza Vaccine for Prevention and Control of Equine Influenza Virus (EIV) in HorsesAugust 2021March 2025Allow4210NoNo
17400041ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUS VARIANT CAPSIDS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOFAugust 2021December 2024Allow4020NoNo
17430018RECOMBINANT HERPES SIMPLEX VIRUS HAVING MODIFIED GLYCOPROTEIN GH FOR RETARGETING AND USE THEREOFAugust 2021December 2024Allow4020NoNo
17427844IN VITRO METHOD FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF VIRAL INFECTIONSAugust 2021December 2024Abandon4110NoNo
17427569IMMUNOCHROMATOGRAPHY ANALYSIS DEVICE FOR DETECTING DENGUE VIRUSJuly 2021January 2025Abandon4110NoNo
17389724ANTI-CORONAVIRUS VACCINESJuly 2021January 2025Allow4121NoNo
17387409METHOD FOR MEASURING VIRAL ANTIGEN IN SAMPLE, ANTIBODY SET, AND REAGENT KITJuly 2021March 2025Allow4320YesNo
17426043PRODUCTION OF VIRUSES IN CONTINUOUSLY GROWING EPITHELIAL CELL LINES DERIVED FROM CHICKEN GUTJuly 2021February 2025Allow4310NoNo
17425791POLYPEPTIDES DIRECTED AGAINST VIRAL INFECTION AND USES THEREOFJuly 2021March 2025Allow4310NoNo
17425534METHODS FOR SCREENING POLYPEPTIDES CAPABLE OF BINDING SPECIFIC TARGET MOLECULES AND TOOLS RELATED THERETOJuly 2021July 2025Allow4720YesNo
17425618SEED CULTURE PROCESS FOR AAV PRODUCTIONJuly 2021January 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17305796VIROFIND: A NOVEL PLATFORM FOR DETECTION AND DISCOVERY OF THE ENTIRE VIROGENOME IN CLINICAL SAMPLESJuly 2021November 2024Abandon4010NoNo
17421816USE OF HLA-A*11:01-RESTRICTED HEPATITIS B VIRUS (HBV) PEPTIDES FOR IDENTIFYING HBV-SPECIFIC CD8+ T CELLSJuly 2021April 2025Allow4620NoNo
17421541FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE VIRUS-LIKE PARTICLE ANTIGEN, AND VACCINE COMPOSITION, PREPARATION METHOD, AND APPLICATION THEREOFJuly 2021December 2024Allow4220YesNo
17414759SERUM-FREE MEDIUM FOR AVIAN VACCINE PRODUCTION AND USES THEREOFJune 2021June 2025Allow4830NoNo
17413853PATHOGEN-ASSOCIATED MOLECULAR PATTERN MOLECULES AND RNA IMMUNOGENIC COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USING THE COMPOSITIONS FOR TREATING CANCERJune 2021January 2025Abandon4310NoNo
17413203HETEROLOGOUS PRIME BOOST VACCINE COMPOSITIONS AND METHODSJune 2021March 2025Abandon4520NoNo
17413228PRODUCTION OF VIRAL VACCINES ON AN AVIAN CELL LINEJune 2021November 2024Abandon4210NoNo
17299520ENGINEERED HANSENULA FUNGI EFFICIENTLY EXPRESSING CA10 VIRUS-LIKE PARTICLES AND USES THEREOFJune 2021November 2024Allow4220YesNo
17293364STABILIZED PRE-FUSION RSV F PROTEINSMay 2021February 2025Allow4520NoNo
17289336SYSTEM FOR PROTEIN INACTIVATION AND RECOMBINANT PHAGES FOR TARGETED BACTERIAL KILLING, INFECTION, BIODETECTION, AND AS A MEANS OF PROTEIN EXTRACTIONApril 2021October 2024Allow4110NoNo
17231415SIV ENVELOPE TRIMERApril 2021December 2024Allow4420YesNo
17269955COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR MODULATING TRANSDUCTION EFFICIENCY OF ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUSESFebruary 2021August 2024Allow4211NoNo
17261501METHODS FOR SCREENING AND IDENTIFYING AGENTS THAT INHIBIT OR MODULATE THE NUCLEAR EGRESS COMPLEX OF HERPESVIRUSESJanuary 2021October 2024Allow4510NoNo
17055151VIRUS VECTOR PRODUCTIONNovember 2020March 2025Allow5220YesNo
17050608SCALABLE CLARIFICATION PROCESS FOR RECOMBINANT AAV PRODUCTIONOctober 2020March 2025Allow5210NoNo
17042043METHODS OF MANUFACTURING GENETICALLY-MODIFIED LYMPHOCYTESSeptember 2020April 2025Abandon5520NoYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
0.8%
Lower 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, 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.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC works in Art Unit 1671 and has examined 37 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 70.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 42 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC's allowance rate of 70.3% places them in the 25% 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 STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC receive 1.59 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 42% 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 STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC is 42 months. This places the examiner in the 4% 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 +35.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by STUART, CAREY ALEXANDER MC. This interview benefit is in the 86% 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, 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 70.0% 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.

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 3% 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.