USPTO Examiner CROW ROBERT THOMAS - Art Unit 1683

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19192017DETECTION AND DIGITAL QUANTITATION OF MULTIPLE TARGETSApril 2025October 2025Allow611YesNo
19049943DETECTION AND DIGITAL QUANTITATION OF MULTIPLE TARGETSFebruary 2025September 2025Allow720YesNo
17932533GUANINE-RICH OLIGONUCLEOTIDESSeptember 2022December 2025Abandon3910NoNo
17909844Heteromultivalent Spherical Nucleic Acids and Uses in Therapeutic and Diagnostic ApplicationsSeptember 2022August 2025Allow3610NoNo
17830901SURFACE-IMMOBILIZED BISTABLE POLYNUCLEOTIDE DEVICES FOR THE SENSING AND QUANTIFICATION OF MOLECULAR EVENTSJune 2022December 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17537153Method and System for Multiplex Genetic AnalysisNovember 2021December 2025Abandon4920NoNo
17520580METHODS AND DEVICES FOR STORING OR STABILIZING MOLECULESNovember 2021December 2025Abandon4911NoNo
17266245FLOW CELLS WITH STABLE POLYMER COATING AND THEIR USES FOR GENE SEQUENCINGFebruary 2021December 2025Abandon5801NoNo
16930197SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND COMPOSITIONS FOR ENHANCING THE SPECIFICITY OF NUCLEIC ACID HYBRIDIZATIONJuly 2020December 2025Abandon6030NoNo
16460778FILMS FOR BIOLOGIC ANALYTE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS AND METHODS OF PRODUCTION AND USE THEREOFJuly 2019August 2019Allow200YesNo
15651379BIOLOGIC SAMPLE COLLECTION DEVICES AND METHODS OF PRODUCTION AND USE THEREOFJuly 2017April 2019Allow2101YesNo
15644273METHOD OF DESIGNING ADDRESSABLE ARRAY SUITABLE FOR DETECTION OF NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCE DIFFERENCES USING LIGASE DETECTION REACTIONJuly 2017July 2018Allow1210YesNo
15319611Embedding Medium for Biological Samples, Method for Producing Embedded Biological Samples, and Use ThereofDecember 2016April 2019Allow2811YesNo
15376147METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DIRECTING A LOCALIZED BIOLOGICAL RESPONSE TO AN IMPLANTDecember 2016October 2019Allow3420NoYes
15237490COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR PREPARING OLIGONUCLEOTIDE SOLUTIONSAugust 2016June 2017Allow1020YesNo
14784569METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING NANOPARTICLE ARRAY, SURFACE PLASMON RESONANCE-BASED SENSOR AND METHOD FOR ANALYZING USING SAMEFebruary 2016March 2019Allow4121YesNo
14888468SELF-ASSEMBLED PEPTIDE NUCLEIC ACIDSNovember 2015April 2017Allow1711YesNo
14206781SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOFMarch 2014November 2014Allow800NoNo
13976557METHOD FOR IMMOBILISING NUCLEIC LIGANDSSeptember 2013July 2017Allow4841YesNo
13947777METHOD OF DESIGNING ADDRESSABLE ARRAY SUITABLE FOR DETECTION OF NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCE DIFFERENCES USING LIGASE DETECTION REACTIONJuly 2013January 2016Allow3010NoNo
13898105METHOD OF PATTERNING SELF-ORGANIZING MATERIAL, PATTERNED SUBSTRATE OF SELF-ORGANIZING MATERIAL AND METHOD OF PRODUCING THE SAME, AND PHOTOMASK USING PATTERNED SUBSTRATE OF SELF-ORGANIZING MATERIALMay 2013April 2016Allow3511YesNo
13775882DNA INTERCALATOR DETECTIONFebruary 2013January 2015Allow2210YesNo
13626760ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR MONITORING SINGLE MOLECULE DYNAMICSSeptember 2012June 2015Allow3321YesNo
13269041COMPOSITIONS, PRODUCTS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS TO MONITOR WATER AND OTHER ECOSYSTEMSOctober 2011October 2012Allow6011NoNo
12950729SENSOR ARRAYS AND NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCING APPLICATIONSNovember 2010March 2017Allow6070YesYes
12670990MICROFLUIDIC DEVICE FOR TRAPPING SINGLE CELLApril 2010October 2012Allow3210NoNo
12762474DNA INTERCALATOR DETECTIONApril 2010November 2012Allow3121YesNo
12723351LABEL-FREE BIOMOLECULE SENSOR BASED ON SURFACE CHARGE MODULATED IONIC CONDUCTANCEMarch 2010July 2014Allow5341YesNo
12308207Nanosensors and related technologiesDecember 2009March 2015Allow6021YesNo
12573758FOCUSING CHAMBEROctober 2009September 2012Allow3511YesNo
12558440COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR PREPARING OLIGONUCLEOTIDE SOLUTIONSSeptember 2009December 2013Allow5141YesNo
11995131EMULSIFIER PREPARED USING A GLYCOSYL TRANSFERASEMarch 2009February 2012Allow4911YesNo
11920560Polymer Compound For Medical Material, And Biochip Substrate Using The Polymer CompoundFebruary 2009January 2015Allow6041YesNo
12319168NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCING AND ELECTRONIC DETECTIONDecember 2008June 2013Allow5330YesNo
12090233INTEGRATED MICROFLUIDIC ANALYSIS SYSTEMSDecember 2008August 2014Allow6021YesYes
12227904RNA DETECTION METHODDecember 2008September 2011Allow3410YesNo
12301550DEVICE AND METHOD FOR THE AUTOMATED AND REPRODUCIBLE PRODUCTION OF CELL OR TISSUE SAMPLES THAT ARE TO BE ANALYZED AND ARE ARRANGED ON OBJECT SUPPORTSNovember 2008May 2013Allow5421YesNo
12252169METHOD OF DESIGNING ADDRESSABLE ARRAY SUITABLE FOR DETECTION OF NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCE DIFFERENCES USING LIGASE DETECTION REACTIONOctober 2008February 2013Allow5210YesNo
12221541COMPOSITIONS, PRODUCTS, METHODS AND SYSTEMS TO MONITOR WATER AND OTHER ECOSYSTEMSAugust 2008June 2011Allow3411YesNo
12165379SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ELECTRONIC DETECTION WITH NANOFETSJune 2008June 2015Allow6051YesNo
12118028ELECTRICAL DETECTION USING CONFINED FLUIDSMay 2008June 2015Allow6021YesYes
12054325SURFACE MEDIATED SELF-ASSEMBLY OF NANOPARTICLESMarch 2008June 2012Allow5021YesNo
11716450Nucleic acid arrays to monitor water and other ecosystemsMarch 2007April 2015Allow6041YesNo
11637027Method and biochip for studying a chemical sampleDecember 2006December 2014Allow6032YesNo
11593021Method and device for the detection of molecular interactionsNovember 2006September 2014Allow6041NoNo
11338124NANOPARTICLES FOR MANIPULATION OF BIOPOLYMERS AND METHODS OF THEREOFJanuary 2006February 2011Allow6012NoNo
11323742BIOMOLECULE DETECTOR AND DETECTION METHOD USING THE SAMEDecember 2005May 2012Allow6051YesNo
11253987IN SITU DILUTION OF EXTERNAL CONTROLS FOR USE IN MICROARRAYSOctober 2005December 2011Allow6021YesYes
11226696Sensor arrays and nucleic acid sequencing applicationsSeptember 2005January 2015Allow6071YesYes
11211846REUSABLE SUBSTRATE FOR DNA MICROARRAY PRODUCTIONAugust 2005February 2011Allow6031YesYes
11071849NUCLEIC ACID ARRAYS TO MONITOR WATER AND OTHER ECOSYSTEMSMarch 2005December 2006Allow2111YesNo
11047250METHOD AND APPARATUS TO SEPARATE MOLECULES ACCORDING TO THEIR MOBILITIESJanuary 2005April 2009Allow5021NoYes
11011265CARBON ELECTRODE SURFACE FOR ATTACHMENT OF DNA AND PROTEIN MOLECULESDecember 2004November 2009Allow5930YesNo
10902495METHOD OF TRANSCRIBING BIOMOLECULAR PATTERNS, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING CHIP BOARDS, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING BIOCHIPSJuly 2004November 2008Allow5131NoNo
10488587READING, DETECTION OR QUANTIFICATION METHOD, HYBRIDS OR COMPLEXES USED IN SAID METHOD AND THE BIOCHIP USING SAMEApril 2004March 2009Allow6031YesNo
10257158METHOD OF DESIGNING ADDRESSABLE ARRAY FOR DETECTION OF NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCE DIFFERENCES USING LIGASE DETECTION REACTIONApril 2004June 2008Allow6012YesNo
10722290MICROARRAY HYBRIDIZATION DEVICE HAVING BUBBLE-FRACTURING ELEMENTSNovember 2003March 2007Allow4020YesYes
10677395FUNCTIONALIZED APERTURES FOR THE DETECTION OF CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL MATERIALSOctober 2003August 2010Allow6040YesYes
10461640CLUTCH ASSEMBLY FOR ELECTRIC MOTORS TO PREVENT BACK DRIVEJune 2003July 2004Allow1310NoNo
10422163APPARATUS AND METHODS OF DETECTING FEATURES ON A MICROARRAYApril 2003August 2010Allow6060YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner CROW, ROBERT THOMAS.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
5
Examiner Affirmed
4
(80.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(20.0%)
Reversal Percentile
31.1%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 20.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is below the USPTO average, indicating that appeals face more challenges here than typical.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
12
Allowed After Appeal Filing
5
(41.7%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
7
(58.3%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
69.1%
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, 41.7% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

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

Examiner CROW, ROBERT THOMAS - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner CROW, ROBERT THOMAS works in Art Unit 1683 and has examined 55 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 92.7%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 51 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner CROW, ROBERT THOMAS's allowance rate of 92.7% places them in the 79% 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 CROW, ROBERT THOMAS receive 2.27 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 63% 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 CROW, ROBERT THOMAS is 51 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 +28.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CROW, ROBERT THOMAS. This interview benefit is in the 76% 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, 28.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 51% 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 39.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 60% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 66.7% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 52% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 68.8% of appeals filed. This is in the 54% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 45.5% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 44.4% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 37% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 27.3% of allowed cases (in the 99% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 23.5% of allowed cases (in the 94% 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:

  • 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.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.