Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18592746 | IL-11 ANTIBODIES | March 2024 | December 2024 | Allow | 9 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18500622 | ANTI-STEM CELL FACTOR ANTIBODIES AND METHODS OF BLOCKING THE INTERACTION BETWEEN SCF AND c-KIT | November 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16972460 | MULTI-SPECIFIC BINDING PROTEINS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | August 2023 | December 2024 | Allow | 48 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17669398 | COMPLEMENT C3 ANTIGEN BINDING PROTEINS | February 2022 | January 2025 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17517236 | DOSING FOR TREATMENT WITH ANTI-CD20/ANTI-CD3 BISPECIFIC ANTIBODIES | November 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 40 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 17453151 | METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR TREATMENT OF LUPUS | November 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17513636 | GLYCOPROTEIN WITH REDUCED ACETYLATION RATE OF SIALIC ACID RESIDUES | October 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17412139 | METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS RELATING TO GLP1R VARIANTS | August 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17298174 | Substance for Treating and/or Preventing Intolerance Diseases, and Design Method and Preparation Method thereof | May 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17298158 | Substance for Treating and/or Preventing Allergic Diseases, and Design Method and Preparation Method thereof | May 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17298017 | SUBSTANCE FOR TREATMENT OR PREVENTION OF DISEASES, METHOD FOR DESIGNING THE SAME, AND METHOD FOR PREPARING THE SAME | May 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17328050 | ANTI-PD-1 ANTIBODIES | May 2021 | September 2023 | Allow | 28 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17269449 | HUMAN IL-4R BINDING ANTIBODY, ANTIGEN BINDING FRAGMENT THEREOF, AND MEDICAL USE THEREOF | February 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 42 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17264594 | NOVEL TRANSCRIPTION ACTIVATOR | January 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17263534 | ANTI-SIGLEC-5 ANTIBODIES AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | January 2021 | November 2024 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 17255378 | Anti-CD98hc VNARs for Crossing the Blood Brain Barrier and Type IV VNAR Libraries | December 2020 | October 2024 | Allow | 46 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17125533 | NOVEL BISPECIFIC AGONISTIC 4-1BB ANTIGEN BINDING MOLECULES | December 2020 | November 2024 | Abandon | 47 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16973855 | Novel Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors | December 2020 | March 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16952848 | MULTI-CHAIN CHIMERIC POLYPEPTIDES AND USES THEREOF | November 2020 | May 2024 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17051272 | CARBOXYLATED OSTEOCALCIN FOR TREATMENT OF AMYLOIDOSIS OR DISEASES ASSOCIATED WITH ABNORMAL PROTEIN FOLDING | October 2020 | May 2025 | Abandon | 54 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17050009 | DOWNREGULATION OF SNCA EXPRESSION BY TARGETED EDITING OF DNA-METHYLATION | October 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17045829 | CHIMERIC NOTCH RECEPTORS | October 2020 | April 2025 | Abandon | 54 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17045246 | RAMUCIRUMAB FOR THE TREATMENT OF CANCERS IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS | October 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 17044970 | TRISPECIFIC BINDING MOLECULES AGAINST CANCERS AND USES THEREOF | October 2020 | May 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17041100 | CD47 BINDING AGENTS | September 2020 | February 2025 | Allow | 53 | 1 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 16971712 | CRISPR/Cas9 Systems, and Methods of Use Thereof | August 2020 | March 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16970199 | CANCER LESION TISSUE EVALUATION FOR OPTIMIZING EFFECT OF BORON NEUTRON CAPTURE THERAPY | August 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16967888 | Adhesion Receptor Constructs and Uses Thereof in Natural Killer Cell Immunotherapy | August 2020 | December 2024 | Abandon | 52 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner MIDDLETON, DANAYA L.
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.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner MIDDLETON, DANAYA L works in Art Unit 1674 and has examined 27 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 44.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 47 months.
Examiner MIDDLETON, DANAYA L's allowance rate of 44.4% places them in the 5% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by MIDDLETON, DANAYA L receive 1.93 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 62% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MIDDLETON, DANAYA L is 47 months. This places the examiner in the 1% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +78.4% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MIDDLETON, DANAYA L. This interview benefit is in the 100% 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, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 28% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 66.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 88% 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.
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 93% 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 86% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 57.1% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.
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.
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.