Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18623822 | TIME RELEASED BIODEGRADABLE OR BIOERODIBLE MICROSPHERES OR MICROPARTICLES SUSPENDED IN A SOLIDIFYING DEPOT-FORMING INJECTABLE DRUG FORMULATION | April 2024 | June 2025 | Abandon | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18453123 | TIME RELEASED BIODEGRADABLE OR BIOERODIBLE MICROSPHERES OR MICROPARTICLES SUSPENDED IN A SOLIDIFYING DEPOT-FORMING INJECTABLE DRUG FORMULATION | August 2023 | May 2025 | Abandon | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18146921 | TIME RELEASED BIODEGRADABLE OR BIOERODIBLE MICROSPHERES OR MICROPARTICLES SUSPENDED IN A SOLIDIFYING DEPOT-FORMING INJECTABLE DRUG FORMULATION | December 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17615941 | Method of Treating Cancer by Intratumoral Deposition of Radioactive Microparticles | December 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17522498 | Methods And Systems For Quantum Computing Enabled Molecular AB Initio Simulations | November 2021 | January 2026 | Allow | 50 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17452884 | DRUG DISCOVERY USING A PSEUDO CONCENTRATION-RESPONSE CURVE | October 2021 | December 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17607129 | SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFICATION OF NON-IMMUNOGENIC EPITOPES AND DETERMINING EFFICACY OF EPITOPES IN THERAPEUTIC REGIMENS | October 2021 | December 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17450700 | STABLE STRUCTURE SEARCH METHOD, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND STABLE STRUCTURE SEARCH DEVICE | October 2021 | July 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17250722 | IMMUNOGENETIC CANCER SCREENING TEST | September 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 57 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17440962 | Method and System for Optimizing Research and Development Experimentations | September 2021 | October 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17396324 | INTERACTIVE USER INTERFACE FOR PROVIDING TREATMENT INFORMATION | August 2021 | September 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17416121 | Methods and Systems for the Precise Identification of Immunogenic Tumor Neoantigens | June 2021 | September 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17332219 | Hyperlocal Prediction of Epidemic Dynamics and Risks | May 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17324793 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETECTION AND PHASING OF COMPLEX GENETIC VARIANTS | May 2021 | October 2025 | Allow | 53 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17317618 | METHODS OF PREDICTING OR VALIDATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF STACS ON THE BINDING BETWEEN NAD+ AND SIRTUINS | May 2021 | December 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner FONSECA LOPEZ, FRANCINI ALVARENGA works in Art Unit 1685 and has examined 12 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 16.7%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 50 months.
Examiner FONSECA LOPEZ, FRANCINI ALVARENGA's allowance rate of 16.7% places them in the 2% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by FONSECA LOPEZ, FRANCINI ALVARENGA receive 1.08 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by FONSECA LOPEZ, FRANCINI ALVARENGA is 50 months. This places the examiner in the 5% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +100.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by FONSECA LOPEZ, FRANCINI ALVARENGA. 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, 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 98% 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 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'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.
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.