USPTO Examiner KORNAKOV MIKHAIL - Art Unit 1714

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
13670962Graphite Crucible for Silicon Crystal Production and Method of Ingot RemovalNovember 2012February 2016Abandon3910NoNo
13503283DEVICE FOR OBTAINING A MULTICRYSTALLINE SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIAL, IN PARTICULAR SILICON, AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE TEMPERATURE THEREINAugust 2012December 2015Abandon4310NoNo
13515714CRYSTAL GROWING APPARATUS, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING NITRIDE COMPOUND SEMICONDUCTOR CRYSTAL, AND NITRIDE COMPOUND SEMICONDUCTOR CRYSTALJune 2012October 2015Abandon4010NoNo
13510357METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REMOVING PHOSPHORUS AND BORON FROM POLYSILICON BY CONTINUOUSLY SMELTINGMay 2012October 2015Abandon4110NoNo
13443965Single crystal growth method for vertical high temperature and high pressure group III-V compoundApril 2012August 2015Abandon4010NoNo
13394982SUBLIMATION GROWTH OF SIC SINGLE CRYSTALSMarch 2012November 2015Abandon4420YesNo
12819857Solid Hollow Fiber Cooling Crystallization MethodsJune 2010December 2011Abandon1810NoNo
12503469WASHING MACHINE EQUIPPED WITH A RADIATION DRYING UNITJuly 2009January 2011Abandon1810NoNo
12345605SINGLE WAFER DRYER AND DRYING METHODSDecember 2008December 2010Abandon2410NoNo
12290326Jewelry cleaning unitOctober 2008October 2011Abandon3610NoNo
12298038WASHING MACHINE WITH A DISPENSER UNITOctober 2008October 2011Abandon3610NoNo
12245745WAFER EDGE CLEANINGOctober 2008October 2010Abandon2521NoNo
12234028METHOD OF CONTROLLING DISHWASHERSeptember 2008March 2011Abandon2921NoNo
10574188Cleaning Contaminated MaterialsSeptember 2008October 2010Abandon5520NoNo
12204662DISHWASHERSeptember 2008September 2011Abandon3710NoNo
12191476REMOVABLE DISHWASHER FILTRATION SYSTEMAugust 2008December 2011Abandon4020NoNo
12278656WATER RECOVERY ASSEMBLYAugust 2008July 2011Abandon3510NoNo
12135509WET PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DISCHARGING PARTICLES ALONG HORIZONTAL LIQUID FLOWJune 2008July 2011Abandon3711NoNo
12131350DISHWASHER WITH WATER REPLACEMENTJune 2008October 2010Abandon2921NoNo
12114336Water Delivery System For Multi-Position Spray Arm Of A DishwasherMay 2008October 2011Abandon4320YesNo
11792994Cleaning apparatus, cleaning system using cleaning apparatus, cleaning method of substrate-to-be-cleanedApril 2008October 2010Abandon4001NoNo
11992754Device for Fabricating a Ribbon of Silicon or Other Crystalline Materials and Method of FabricationMarch 2008July 2011Abandon4010NoNo
12088386METHOD OF INJECTING DOPANT GASMarch 2008December 2011Abandon4520NoNo
12053922SUBSTRATE TREATING APPARATUSMarch 2008October 2011Abandon4221NoNo
12054133OPTIMIZED LASER PYROLYSIS REACTOR AND METHODS THEREFORMarch 2008December 2011Abandon4510YesNo
12024152Dishwashing Machine With Heating ControlFebruary 2008July 2011Abandon4221YesNo
11662178Laundry DeviceJanuary 2008August 2011Abandon5321NoNo
11995143Method for Wiping a Window, and Wiper System, in Particular for a Motor VehicleJanuary 2008December 2010Abandon3510NoNo
12005270Method for forming a microcrystalline silicon filmDecember 2007January 2012Abandon4940NoNo
11870912DEVICE FOR PREPARATION AND DISPENSING OF BEVERAGES, WITH CLEANING DEVICEOctober 2007January 2011Abandon3921NoNo
11910977Semiconductor Wafer Cleaning SystemOctober 2007October 2011Abandon4840NoNo
11867916SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHODOctober 2007March 2011Abandon4121NoNo
11896563Method for producing silicon single crystal and method for producing silicon waferSeptember 2007December 2011Abandon5111NoNo
11847656METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATEAugust 2007January 2012Abandon5231NoNo
11794809Substrate Processing Method and ApparatusJuly 2007November 2010Abandon4120NoNo
11794796Plasma cleaning methodJuly 2007December 2010Abandon4210NoNo
11792658Method for Cleaning a Workpiece With the Aid of Halogen IonsJune 2007October 2010Abandon4020NoNo
11758383BRUSH AND METHODS OF CLEANING A BRUSHJune 2007March 2011Abandon4511NoNo
11791383Dishwashing Machine Equipped with a Sorption Drying DeviceMay 2007June 2012Abandon6050YesYes
11748654SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUSMay 2007February 2011Abandon4521NoNo
11796989Method for removing carbide-based coatingsApril 2007October 2010Abandon4220NoNo
11741722METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR OPERATING AN INKJET PRINTING SYSTEMApril 2007December 2010Abandon4421NoNo
11710995Cleaning apparatus, cleaning method and product manufacturing methodFebruary 2007March 2011Abandon4831NoNo
10555598Device and Method for Preventing Foreign Matters from Adhering in DishwasherFebruary 2007June 2011Abandon6021NoNo
11699300Method for cleaning a nebulizerJanuary 2007April 2012Abandon6020NoYes
10576983Tableware-washing process including a biocideDecember 2006December 2010Abandon5520NoNo
11639429System and method for cleaning a contactor deviceDecember 2006March 2011Abandon5121NoNo
11565160Hydrogen Peroxide Foam TreatmentNovember 2006November 2010Abandon4821NoNo
11561868IN-SITU CHAMBER CLEANING FOR AN RTP CHAMBERNovember 2006November 2012Abandon6020NoYes
11551819CLEANING APPARATUS WITH DISPOSABLE ELEMENTS AND METHODS OF CLEANINGOctober 2006October 2010Abandon4721NoNo
11536292METHODS TO ACCELERATE PHOTOIMAGEABLE MATERIAL STRIPPING FROM A SUBSTRATESeptember 2006October 2010Abandon4931NoNo
11519899Supercritical CO2 cleaning system and methodSeptember 2006October 2010Abandon4931NoNo
11508249Crude oil storage and tank maintenanceAugust 2006June 2011Abandon5721NoNo
11507780Method and apparatus for cleaning tanks and other containersAugust 2006June 2011Abandon5821NoNo
11480148Substrate processing apparatus and substrate processing methodJune 2006October 2010Abandon5212NoNo
11400575Apparatus and method for cleaning a substrateApril 2006December 2010Abandon5621NoNo
11398058Single wafer dryer and drying methodsApril 2006March 2011Abandon5970NoNo
11369590Copper deposition chamber having integrated bevel clean with edge bevel removal detectionMarch 2006October 2010Abandon5531YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
3
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
1.6%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
1.1%
Lower than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

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.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL works in Art Unit 1714 and has examined 58 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 0.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 44 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL's allowance rate of 0.0% places them in the 0% 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 KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL receive 1.91 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 43% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL is 44 months. This places the examiner in the 15% 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 +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by KORNAKOV, MIKHAIL. This interview benefit is in the 13% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 0.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 0% 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 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 0.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 0% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 98% 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.

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.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • 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.