Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19169801 | SAMPLE PREPARATION METHOD | April 2025 | October 2025 | Allow | 7 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18991325 | ANALYSIS OF A POLYMER | December 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 9 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18124212 | SELECTIVE PROTECTION OF NUCLEIC ACIDS | March 2023 | March 2026 | Abandon | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17990255 | NUCLEIC ACID STORAGE FOR BLOCKCHAIN AND NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENS | November 2022 | February 2026 | Abandon | 39 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17925061 | RECOMBINANT HUMAN ANTIBODIES THAT INHIBIT THE HUMAN TISSUE KALLIKREIN 7 (KLK7) AND THEIR USE AGAINST DISEASES THAT CAUSE DESQUAMATION OF THE SKIN | November 2022 | December 2025 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17998266 | Micronuclei DNA From Peripheral Red Blood Cells and Uses Thereof | November 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 40 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17997980 | EXPRESSION OF COLLAGEN PEPTIDE COMPONENTS IN PROKARYOTIC SYSTEMS | November 2022 | February 2026 | Abandon | 40 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17923331 | COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR CHARACTERIZING BOWEL CANCER | November 2022 | February 2026 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17921219 | DEVICES AND METHODS FOR MACROMOLECULAR MANIPULATION | October 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17968446 | SENSOR FOR SIMULTANEOUS CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, AND RADIOLOGICAL/NUCLEAR DETECTION | October 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17968155 | DIAGNOSTIC APPLICATIONS USING NUCLEIC ACID FRAGMENTS | October 2022 | December 2025 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13816709 | Compositions and Methods for Quantifying a Nucleic Acid Sequence in a Sample | October 2022 | April 2022 | Allow | 60 | 10 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17995766 | Anti-CD98 Antibodies And Uses Thereof | October 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17954576 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETECTING COLORECTAL CANCER VIA NUCLEIC ACID METHYLATION ANALYSIS | September 2022 | February 2026 | Abandon | 41 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17914739 | PROTEIN COMPRISING AT LEAST ONE REGULATORY T CELL ACTIVATING EPITOPE | September 2022 | December 2025 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17913926 | SPRING ELEMENT FOR ANALYZING AN ANALYTE | September 2022 | September 2025 | Allow | 36 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17930823 | METHOD FOR PROCESSING POLYNUCLEOTIDE-CONTAINING SAMPLES | September 2022 | January 2026 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17816733 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING MALE INFERTILITY ASSOCIATED WITH ABNORMAL EXPRESSION OF SEX-DETERMINING GENE ON X CHROMOSOME (SDX) OR SDX PROTEIN | August 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 43 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17852192 | ANALYSIS OF A POLYMER | June 2022 | September 2025 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17784708 | JOINT DETECTION METHOD FOR LYMPHANGIOLEIO-MYOMATOSIS AND USE THEREOF | June 2022 | January 2026 | Abandon | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17721500 | DIGITAL METHOD FOR ANALYZING NUCLEIC ACIDS IN SAMPLES | April 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17658593 | USE OF CELL FREE BACTERIAL NUCLEIC ACIDS FOR DETECTION OF CANCER | April 2022 | November 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17637317 | SUPPRESSING FALSE POSITIVES (TYPE I ERROR) DURING ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS | February 2022 | November 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17636612 | Methods for Biomolecular Sensing and Detection | February 2022 | January 2026 | Abandon | 47 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17634382 | URINARY RNA SIGNATURES IN RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (RCC) | February 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 49 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17539522 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING TRANSFORMANT | December 2021 | January 2026 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17609553 | COMBINED SOLUTION PHASE AND SOLID PHASE DNA AMPLIFICATION | November 2021 | November 2025 | Allow | 48 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17482816 | Compositions and Methods for Targeted NGS Sequencing of cfRNA and cfTNA | September 2021 | September 2024 | Allow | 36 | 5 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 17409556 | METHODS TO DETERMINE CARCINOGENESIS, IDENTIFY MARKERS FOR EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS AND IDENTIFY TARGETS OF THERAPY | August 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17407483 | MSBI SEQUENCES AS AN EARLY MARKER FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF CANCER AND DISEASES OF THE CNS AND AS A TARGET FOR THE TREATMENT AND PREVENTION OF THESE DISEASES | August 2021 | October 2025 | Allow | 50 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17309998 | METHOD FOR DETECTING A NUCLEIC ACID SEQUENCE | July 2021 | March 2026 | Allow | 56 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16311442 | METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR PURIFYING RNA | December 2018 | December 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15545522 | METHOD FOR PREVENTING FALSE POSITIVES IN METHODS EMPLOYING DDNTP's | July 2017 | December 2025 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 12777806 | ANTIBODIES SPECIFIC FOR DKK-1 AND THEIR USES | May 2010 | August 2012 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11612445 | METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR SYNTHESIS OF NUCLEIC ACID MOLECULES USING MULTIPLE RECOGNITION SITES | December 2006 | May 2011 | Allow | 53 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 11496457 | CANCEROUS DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIBODIES | July 2006 | March 2008 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 10535931 | APOPTOSIS-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN AND USE THEREOF | January 2006 | December 2007 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11067366 | CANCEROUS DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIBODIES | February 2005 | October 2007 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11067390 | CANCEROUS DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIBODIES | February 2005 | October 2007 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 10524544 | METHOD FOR THE IMMUNOCYTOLOGICAL OR MOLECULAR DETECTION OF DISSEMINATED TUMOR CELLS FROM A BODY FLUID AND KIT THAT IS SUITABLE THEREFOR | February 2005 | October 2007 | Allow | 32 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 10509073 | CANCER ASSOCIATED GENE MINA 53, PROTEIN MINA 53 AND MONOCLONAL ANTIBODY THEREOF | January 2005 | September 2007 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 10640422 | USE OF MULTIPLE RECOMBINATION SITES WITH UNIQUE SPECIFICITY IN RECOMBINATIONAL CLONING | August 2003 | July 2007 | Allow | 47 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner GUSSOW, ANNE.
With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.
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.
✓ Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner GUSSOW, ANNE works in Art Unit 1683 and has examined 18 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 88.9%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 48 months.
Examiner GUSSOW, ANNE's allowance rate of 88.9% places them in the 70% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by GUSSOW, ANNE receive 2.94 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 85% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by GUSSOW, ANNE is 48 months. This places the examiner in the 7% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +12.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by GUSSOW, ANNE. This interview benefit is in the 48% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 8.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 4% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.
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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 14% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 57.1% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 59% 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 44.4% of allowed cases (in the 100% 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 25.0% 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.
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.