USPTO Examiner VASSELL MEREDITH ABBOTT - Art Unit 1687

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17118421ENHANCED PROTEIN STRUCTURE PREDICTION USING PROTEIN HOMOLOG DISCOVERY AND CONSTRAINED DISTOGRAMSDecember 2020May 2025Abandon5311NoNo
17024656METHOD FOR BUILDING PREDICTIVE MODEL OF MICROORGANISM-DERIVED DISSOLVED ORGANIC NITROGEN IN WASTEWATERSeptember 2020February 2025Abandon5320NoNo
16942222KINEMATIC MODELING OF BIOCHEMICAL PATHWAYSJuly 2020April 2025Abandon5620YesNo
16940380NORMALIZING CHROMOSOMES FOR THE DETERMINATION AND VERIFICATION OF COMMON AND RARE CHROMOSOMAL ANEUPLOIDIESJuly 2020March 2025Allow5620YesNo
16920514METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PERSONALIZED, MOLECULAR BASED HEALTH MANAGEMENT AND DIGITAL CONSULTATION AND TREATMENTJuly 2020December 2024Abandon5321YesNo
16755233METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CHARACTERIZATION OF METABOLISM-ASSOCIATED CONDITIONS, INCLUDING DIAGNOSTICS AND THERAPIES, BASED ON BIOINFORMATICS APPROACHApril 2020October 2024Abandon5420NoNo
16638081METHOD FOR DETECTING GENE REARRANGEMENT BY USING NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCINGFebruary 2020March 2025Abandon6030NoNo
16614588METHOD FOR MEASURING ALPHA VALUE OF MUSCARINIC M1 RECEPTOR POSITIVE ALLOSTERIC MODULATORSNovember 2019January 2025Allow6041YesNo
16669103NONINVASIVE PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS OF FETAL TRISOMY BY ALLELIC RATIO ANALYSIS USING TARGETED MASSIVELY PARALLEL SEQUENCINGOctober 2019March 2025Abandon6030YesNo
16552653ANALYSIS METHOD, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, GENE ANALYSIS SYSTEM AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUMAugust 2019January 2025Abandon6040YesNo
16504184SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PREDICTING EFFECT OF GENOMIC VARIATIONS ON PRE-MRNA SPLICINGJuly 2019October 2024Abandon6040YesNo
16459948DETERMINING CELL, TISSUE, OR LESION REPRESENTATIONS IN CELL-FREE DNAJuly 2019May 2025Allow6060YesNo
16446143METHODS, APPARATUSES, AND SYSTEMS FOR ANALYZING MICROORGANISM STRAINS IN COMPLEX HETEROGENEOUS COMMUNITIES, DETERMINING FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS AND INTERACTIONS THEREOF, AND DIAGNOSTICS AND BIOSTATE MANAGEMENT AND BIOSTATE TEMPORAL FORECASTING BASED THEREONJune 2019November 2024Abandon6011NoNo
15601282INSULIN DELIVERY SYSTEM AND METHODS WITH RISK-BASED SET POINTSMay 2017January 2025Allow6050NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner VASSELL, MEREDITH ABBOTT - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner VASSELL, MEREDITH ABBOTT works in Art Unit 1687 and has examined 14 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 28.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 10000 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner VASSELL, MEREDITH ABBOTT's allowance rate of 28.6% places them in the 4% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by VASSELL, MEREDITH ABBOTT receive 2.93 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 81% 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by VASSELL, MEREDITH ABBOTT 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.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +20.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by VASSELL, MEREDITH ABBOTT. This interview benefit is in the 64% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 10.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 6% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 20.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 26% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 90% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.