USPTO Examiner RUGGIERO OLIVIA MASON - Art Unit 1729

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19174132Lithium Secondary Battery, Battery Module and Battery PackApril 2025December 2025Allow810YesNo
18415666ANODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING THE SAMEJanuary 2024August 2025Allow1930YesNo
18544234LITHIUM-SULFUR BATTERYDecember 2023April 2025Allow1620YesNo
18229940Lithium Secondary Battery, Battery Module and Battery PackAugust 2023October 2025Allow2740YesNo
18259511LITHIUM METAL COMPOSITE OXIDE, POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY, POSITIVE ELECTRODE FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY, AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERYJune 2023March 2026Allow3200NoNo
18265599A POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR RECHARGEABLE BATTERIESJune 2023September 2025Allow2831YesNo
18006148DISPERSANT COMPOSITION FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE, CONDUCTIVE MATERIAL DISPERSION LIQUID FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE, SLURRY COMPOSITION FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE ELECTRODE AND METHOD OF PRODUCING SAME, ELECTRODE FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE, AND ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICEJanuary 2023August 2025Allow3140YesNo
17854291BATTERY, ELECTRICAL APPARATUS, AND PREPARATION METHOD OF BATTERYJune 2022November 2025Abandon4021NoNo
17691681ZERO TRANSITION ELECTRODE COATINGMarch 2022March 2026Abandon4841YesNo
17536102NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SOLUTION OF LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERY, AND LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERYNovember 2021July 2024Allow3110NoNo
17535938ANODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY AND METHOD OF PREPARING THE SAMENovember 2021December 2025Allow4930YesNo
17456589LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERYNovember 2021October 2024Abandon3520NoNo
17535680LITHIUM-CONTAINING SILICON OXIDE COMPOSITE ANODE MATERIAL, METHOD FOR PREPARING SAME, AND LITHIUM ION BATTERYNovember 2021March 2025Abandon4021NoNo
17532704ALL SOLID STATE BATTERYNovember 2021March 2024Allow2810NoNo
17528392COMPOSITE FOAM AS SOLID-ELECTROLYTE INTERFACE FOR SOLID-STATE BATTERIESNovember 2021December 2024Abandon3721NoNo
17454205ELECTROLYTE SOLUTION FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING THE SAMENovember 2021October 2024Allow3510NoNo
17518077ALL-SOLID BATTERYNovember 2021August 2025Allow4540YesNo
17452477NEGATIVE ELECTRODE MATERIAL FOR SECONDARY BATTERYOctober 2021May 2024Allow3010NoNo
17510582NEGATIVE ELECTRODE WITH GRADIENT STRUCTUREOctober 2021July 2025Allow4531YesNo
17509688MULTILAYER ELECTRODE FOR SECONDARY BATTERY AND FABRICATION METHOD THEREOFOctober 2021July 2024Allow3311NoNo
17601175LAYER SYSTEM, BIPOLAR PLATE COMPRISING SUCH A LAYER SYSTEM, AND FUEL CELL PRODUCED THEREWITHOctober 2021April 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17601306POLYMORPHIC LITHIUM-SILICON COMPOUND FOR USE IN PURE SILICON ANODE OF LITHIUM-ION BATTERY AND USE THEREOFOctober 2021May 2025Allow4311NoNo
17485261EXTINGUISHING BATTERY THERMAL RUNAWAYSeptember 2021November 2025Abandon4941YesNo
17442520CATHODE MATERIAL AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF AND SECONDARY LITHIUM BATTERYSeptember 2021January 2026Allow5241NoNo
17447305SOLID ELECTROLYTE AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SOLID ELECTROLYTESeptember 2021October 2024Allow3710YesNo
17411504Solid Electrolyte, Method for Producing Solid Electrolyte, and CompositeAugust 2021April 2024Allow3211NoNo
17366527MOTOR VEHICLEJuly 2021February 2026Allow5521YesNo
17350775Electric Work VehicleJune 2021March 2026Abandon5740NoNo
17415078ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFORJune 2021February 2026Abandon5641NoNo
16971180METHOD FOR PREPROCESSING LITHIUM METAL FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERYAugust 2020March 2024Allow4311YesNo

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 RUGGIERO, OLIVIA MASON - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RUGGIERO, OLIVIA MASON works in Art Unit 1729 and has examined 21 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 66.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 43 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RUGGIERO, OLIVIA MASON's allowance rate of 66.7% places them in the 27% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by RUGGIERO, OLIVIA MASON receive 2.14 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 58% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by RUGGIERO, OLIVIA MASON is 43 months. This places the examiner in the 16% 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 +28.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RUGGIERO, OLIVIA MASON. 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 18.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 18% 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 22.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 28% 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 5% 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 5% 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:

  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.