Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18930599 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR IMPROVED BASE CALL RESOLUTION OF ELECTROPHEROGRAM OUTPUT GENERATED FROM MIXED SAMPLES | October 2024 | January 2026 | Abandon | 14 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18634443 | PAN-CANCER TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT CLASSIFICATION BASED ON IMMUNE ESCAPE MECHANISMS AND IMMUNE INFILTRATION | April 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17311067 | Quantitative Centrosomal Amplification Score to Predict Local Recurrence of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ | June 2021 | March 2026 | Allow | 57 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17334958 | Method and System for Simulating Surgical Procedures | May 2021 | August 2025 | Allow | 51 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17291742 | BOLTZMANN-BASED METHOD FOR SIMULATING CVI DENSIFICATION PROCESS OF COMPOSITE MATERIAL | May 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 47 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17313553 | THERAPEUTIC RESPONSE PREDICTION BASED ON SYNTHETIC TUMOR MODELS | May 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17308106 | Robustness of Hydrolases by Combining High-pressure Molecular Dynamics Simulation and Free Energy Calculation | May 2021 | October 2025 | Allow | 53 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17238593 | MULTI-FACTOR ACTIVITY MONITORING | April 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17238010 | POTENCY TESTING | April 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17287879 | Systems and Methods for Active Transfer Learning with Deep Featurization | April 2021 | December 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17287438 | TKA INTRAOPERATIVE PLANNING ADJUSTMENT METHOD, APPARATUS AND DEVICE FOR TKA | April 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 46 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17232058 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CORRECTING SAMPLE PREPARATION ARTIFACTS IN DROPLET-BASED SEQUENCING | April 2021 | August 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17276414 | METHOD | March 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17200836 | MOLECULAR SIMILARITY SEARCH | March 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17196420 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING AND SEARCHING A CHEMICAL COMPOUND DATABASE | March 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17195548 | METHODS AND DEVICES FOR DETECTING DIABETIC NEPHROPATHY AND ASSOCIATED DISORDERS | March 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17195210 | MATERIAL DESIGN PROGRAM | March 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17182147 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VISUALIZING ADAPTIVE IMMUNE CELL CLONOTYPING DATA | February 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17163989 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATING ANTIBODY LIBRARIES | February 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17260969 | BLOOD COAGULATION SYSTEM ANALYSIS DEVICE | January 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17147506 | MATERIAL DESCRIPTOR GENERATION METHOD, MATERIAL DESCRIPTOR GENERATION DEVICE, RECORDING MEDIUM STORING MATERIAL DESCRIPTOR GENERATION PROGRAM, PREDICTIVE MODEL CONSTRUCTION METHOD, PREDICTIVE MODEL CONSTRUCTION DEVICE, AND RECORDING MEDIUM STORING PREDICTIVE MODEL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM | January 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 58 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17140544 | PREDICTING BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE BASED ON COMPUTERIZED QUANTIFICATION OF CRIBRIFORM MORPHOLOGY | January 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17118172 | PROTEIN HOMOLOG DISCOVERY | December 2020 | August 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16972811 | METHOD FOR PREDICTING IMMUNOTHERAPY RESPONSE WITH CORRECTED TMB | December 2020 | February 2026 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16971891 | PATIENT ASSESSMENT METHOD | August 2020 | April 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16851969 | BIOMARKERS FOR DIAGNOSIS OF LUNG DISEASES AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | April 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 57 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16808814 | APPARATUS AND SYSTEMS FOR EVENT DETECTION USING PROBABILISTIC MEASURES | March 2020 | May 2025 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16752479 | DETECTING AND CLASSIFYING COPY NUMBER VARIATION | January 2020 | August 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16708572 | USING BIOMARKER INFORMATION FOR HEART FAILURE RISK COMPUTATION | December 2019 | August 2025 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16682487 | BONE MARROW FLUID ANALYSIS METHOD, SAMPLE ANALYZER, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM | November 2019 | August 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 16218694 | DETERMINING PROSPECTIVE RISK OF HEART FAILURE HOSPITALIZATION | December 2018 | June 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16115444 | METHODS FOR PREDICTING OR DETECTING DISEASE | August 2018 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 8 | 2 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ROSSI, VY BUI.
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.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner ROSSI, VY BUI works in Art Unit 1685 and has examined 30 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 30.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 52 months.
Examiner ROSSI, VY BUI's allowance rate of 30.0% places them in the 4% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by ROSSI, VY BUI receive 2.30 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 65% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ROSSI, VY BUI is 52 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +28.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ROSSI, VY BUI. 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 12.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 7% 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 21.4% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 27% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 87% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.
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.