USPTO Examiner BEIL RANDI LYNN - Art Unit 1675

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17109348PREPARATION OF DNA SEQUENCING LIBRARIES FOR DETECTION OF DNA PATHOGENS IN PLASMADecember 2020June 2024Abandon4331NoNo
17058066Methods of Producing Nucleic Acid Libraries and Compositions and Kits for Practicing SameNovember 2020February 2023Allow2711NoNo
17089432PROBE FOR DETECTING HEPATITIS B VIRUS AND USE THEREOFNovember 2020August 2023Allow3311NoNo
17071917METHODS OF IDENTIFYING MULTIPLE EPITOPES IN CELLSOctober 2020April 2024Allow4201NoNo
17045066DEGRADABLE CARRIER NUCLEIC ACID FOR USE IN THE EXTRACTION, PRECIPITATION AND/OR PURIFICATION OF NUCLEIC ACIDSOctober 2020May 2024Abandon4411NoNo
16980721HIGH THROUGHPUT METHOD OF PERSONALIZED TARGET ENRICHMENT PANEL ASSEMBLYSeptember 2020October 2023Abandon3801NoNo
17017483CYCLONE ROLLING CIRCLE AMPLIFICATION, DOUBLE PRIMER FOR ROLONY AND REPLI-ROLONY AND PAIR-END SEQUENCING PROCESSSeptember 2020May 2023Abandon3301NoNo
17004403PROTEIN SURFACE RECOGNITION VIA CHEMICALLY ENHANCED PHAGE DISPLAYAugust 2020December 2023Allow3921NoNo
16999993LIGATION MEDIATED ANALYSIS OF NUCLEIC ACIDSAugust 2020April 2023Abandon3110NoNo
16944185METHOD FOR ANALYZING AN INTERACTION EFFECT OF NUCLEIC ACID SEGMENTS IN NUCLEIC ACID COMPLEXJuly 2020March 2023Abandon3201NoNo
16919500TIM-3 NANOBODY, A PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF, AND USE THEREOFJuly 2020September 2023Allow3821NoNo
16632268IMPROVED METHOD AND KIT FOR THE GENERATION OF DNA LIBRARIES FOR MASSIVELY PARALLEL SEQUENCINGJanuary 2020August 2023Allow4311NoNo
16564135Method For Detecting Activity Change Of Transposon In Plant Before And After Stress TreatmentSeptember 2019March 2023Abandon4210NoNo
16146901ENRICHMENT OF SHORT NUCLEIC ACID FRAGMENTS IN SEQUENCING LIBRARY PREPARATIONSeptember 2018August 2023Allow5831NoNo

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 BEIL, RANDI LYNN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner BEIL, RANDI LYNN works in Art Unit 1675 and has examined 14 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 50.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 39 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner BEIL, RANDI LYNN's allowance rate of 50.0% places them in the 13% 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 BEIL, RANDI LYNN receive 1.14 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 11% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BEIL, RANDI LYNN is 39 months. This places the examiner in the 26% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 73% 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 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 75% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 120.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 95% 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 3% 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.

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.