USPTO Examiner BENZION GARY - Art Unit 1681

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18803324COMPOSITION COMPRISING CELL ORIGINATION BARCODES FOR THE ANALYSIS OF BOTH GENOMIC DNA AND CDNA FROM THE SAME CELLAugust 2024October 2024Allow200NoNo
18542373SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 21240438December 2023January 2026Allow2510NoNo
18534677PLANTS AND SEEDS OF HYBRID CORN VARIETY CH010492December 2023January 2026Allow2510NoNo
18519126SOYBEAN VARIETY 01098329November 2023January 2026Allow2610NoNo
18513379SOYBEAN VARIETY 01098336November 2023January 2026Allow2610NoNo
18497224VARIETY CORN LINE TPFX7814October 2023January 2026Allow2610NoNo
18493979MATERIALS AND METHODS FOR INHIBITING A VIRAL INFECTION, INCLUDING A CORONAVIRUS INFECTIONOctober 2023May 2025Allow1911YesNo
18492628SOYBEAN CULTIVAR 22080703October 2023September 2025Allow2310NoNo
18467021HYBRID TOMATO VARIETY 72-CK0621 RZSeptember 2023December 2025Allow2710NoNo
17311521Methods for Preparing CDNA Samples for RNA Sequencing, and CDNA Samples and Uses ThereofJune 2021September 2025Allow5231YesNo
14098519METHODS AND KITS USING EXTENDED RHODAMINE DYESDecember 2013July 2015Allow1900NoNo
12466565PURIFIED LINEAR EPITOPES FROM CASHEW NUTS, NUCLEIC ACIDS ENDCODING THEREFOR AND ASSOCIATED METHODSMay 2009January 2012Allow3321NoNo
11299124DNA POLYMERASES HAVING IMPROVED LABELED NUCLEOTIDE INCORPORATION PROPERTIESDecember 2005March 2010Allow5231YesNo
09802358METHOD FOR 3' END-LABELING RIBONUCLEIC ACIDSMarch 2001November 2003Allow3240NoNo

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 BENZION, GARY - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner BENZION, GARY works in Art Unit 1681 and has examined 5 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 33 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner BENZION, GARY's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 94% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by BENZION, GARY receive 2.40 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 69% 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 BENZION, GARY is 33 months. This places the examiner in the 46% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BENZION, GARY. This interview benefit is in the 12% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

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 96% 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 75.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 94% 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, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.

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 40.0% of allowed cases (in the 96% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

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.

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.