Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17132752 | EXAMINATION OF NETWORK EFFECTS OF IMMUNE MODULATION | December 2020 | April 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16972035 | METHOD FOR CALCULATING KINETIC PARAMETERS OF A REACTION NETWORK | December 2020 | February 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17005569 | METHODS FOR DETECTING ABSENCE OF HETEROZYGOSITY BY LOW-PASS GENOME SEQUENCING | August 2020 | November 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16818188 | COMPUTING AND DISPLAYING A CONCENTRATION OF A QUANTIFIED REFERENCE MATERIAL IN A PLATE ACCORDING TO A NON-PARAMETRIC CONTRATION DISTRIBUTION | March 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 55 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16584936 | MODELS FOR TARGETED SEQUENCING OF RNA | September 2019 | October 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16410978 | SEQUENCE VARIATION DETECTION USING DEEP LEARNING | May 2019 | April 2025 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16337819 | GENOME-SCALE HIGH-RESOLUTION MAPPING OF ACTIVATING AND REPRESSIVE NUCLEOTIDES IN REGULATORY REGIONS | March 2019 | May 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16280022 | System and Method for Correlated Error Event Mitigation for Variant Calling | February 2019 | March 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16325357 | NANOPORE SEQUENCING BASE CALLING | February 2019 | April 2025 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16316320 | FLOW CYTOMETRY DATA PROCESSING FOR ANTIMICROBIAL AGENT SENSIBILITY PREDICTION | January 2019 | June 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16231307 | ERROR REMOVAL USING IMPROVED LIBRARY PREPARATION METHODS | December 2018 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16226380 | GENETIC INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM WITH MUTATION ANALYSIS MECHANISM AND METHOD OF OPERATION THEREOF | December 2018 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16043780 | METHODS FOR IMPROVED ARRAYS OR LIBRARIES USING NORMALIZATION STRATEGIES BASED ON MOLECULAR STRUCTURE | July 2018 | January 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16036711 | Threshold Method and Device for Analyzing a Biological Dataset | July 2018 | October 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 15738234 | EXAMINATION SYSTEM, EXAMINATION DEVICE, AND EXAMINATION METHOD FOR TESTING SAMPLE QUALITY PRIOR TO BIOMARKER DETECTION | December 2017 | September 2024 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 1 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner SCHULTZHAUS, JANNA NICOLE.
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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner SCHULTZHAUS, JANNA NICOLE works in Art Unit 1685 and has examined 15 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 20.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 10000 months.
Examiner SCHULTZHAUS, JANNA NICOLE's allowance rate of 20.0% places them in the 3% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by SCHULTZHAUS, JANNA NICOLE receive 3.73 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 94% 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 SCHULTZHAUS, JANNA NICOLE is 10000 months. This places the examiner in the 0% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -30.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SCHULTZHAUS, JANNA NICOLE. This interview benefit is in the 1% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 8.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 5% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 44% 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'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 4% 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.