USPTO Examiner DYE ROBERT C - Art Unit 1749

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18864851A VEHICLE WHEEL TYRENovember 2024December 2025Allow1310NoNo
17905307TIREAugust 2022October 2023Allow1410NoNo
17668829TIRE TREAD INCLUDING SERRATIONS IN RECESSED POCKETS OF GROOVE SIDEWALLFebruary 2022April 2023Abandon1410NoNo
17540357PNEUMATIC TIREDecember 2021November 2023Allow2410NoNo
17594321PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2021November 2022Allow1320NoNo
17310741PNEUMATIC TIREAugust 2021December 2023Allow2830YesNo
17406124TIREAugust 2021March 2023Allow1920YesNo
17375138TIREJuly 2021February 2023Allow1910NoNo
17317026TIREMay 2021January 2023Allow2010NoNo
17232578TIREApril 2021October 2023Allow3010YesNo
17206847TIREMarch 2021December 2023Allow3320YesNo
17257525Pneumatic TireDecember 2020July 2021Allow610NoNo
17257155PNEUMATIC TIREDecember 2020November 2023Allow3510YesNo
17116392TIREDecember 2020June 2023Allow3011YesNo
17048546Pneumatic TireOctober 2020September 2022Allow2340NoNo
17060778TIREOctober 2020March 2023Allow3010YesNo
16980861PNEUMATIC VEHICLE TIRESeptember 2020April 2021Allow710NoNo
16766110TIREAugust 2020June 2023Abandon3720NoNo
16994286SOUNDPROOF TYRE FOR VEHICLE WHEELSAugust 2020October 2022Abandon2610NoNo
16969953Pneumatic TireAugust 2020August 2023Allow3620YesNo
16945209TIREJuly 2020February 2023Allow3110NoNo
16966421Pneumatic TireJuly 2020January 2023Allow2910YesNo
16912550Pneumatic TireJune 2020September 2023Allow3920NoNo
16901504TREAD WEAR INDICATORJune 2020February 2023Abandon3220NoNo
16771496Utility Vehicle TireJune 2020January 2024Allow4340NoNo
16770961TIREJune 2020October 2022Abandon2810NoNo
16896058TYREJune 2020October 2022Allow2910NoNo
16769269TIREJune 2020February 2023Allow3220NoNo
16769430TIREJune 2020March 2023Abandon3420YesNo
16769276TIREJune 2020September 2022Abandon2810NoNo
16766637Pneumatic TireMay 2020July 2022Allow2610NoNo
16763961Pneumatic TireMay 2020February 2023Allow3310NoNo
16865845TYREMay 2020March 2023Allow3420YesNo
16845337MOTORCYCLE TIREApril 2020November 2021Allow1910NoNo
16650064INCLINED STONE EJECTOR FOR IRREGULAR WEAR PROTECTIONMarch 2020January 2022Allow2210YesNo
16636009Pneumatic TireFebruary 2020January 2023Allow3510YesNo
16634119Pneumatic TireJanuary 2020October 2022Allow3310YesNo
16750801TYREJanuary 2020May 2023Allow3921YesNo
16718754TIRE WITH TREAD ELEMENTS INCLUDING DUAL ANGLED CHAMFERDecember 2019September 2022Allow3320YesNo
16623763PNEUMATIC TIRE WITH NOISE SUPPRESSING MEMBER, TIRE/RIM ASSEMBLY, AND NOISE SUPPRESSING MEMBERDecember 2019June 2022Abandon3020NoNo
16619919Pneumatic TireDecember 2019February 2021Allow1410NoNo
16616004PNEUMATIC TIRENovember 2019January 2022Allow2610NoNo
16690479TYRE FOR A MOTORCYCLENovember 2019January 2023Allow3811NoNo
16658167TIREOctober 2019August 2022Allow3430YesNo
16591953PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2019February 2022Allow2920YesNo
16496751PNEUMATIC TIRESeptember 2019July 2020Allow1000NoNo
16487818Pneumatic TireAugust 2019May 2022Allow3220YesNo
16411624TIRE TREAD INCLUDING SERRATIONS IN RECESSED POCKETS OF GROOVE SIDEWALLMay 2019January 2022Allow3210NoNo
16393037PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2019October 2021Allow3020NoNo
16343520Tire Having An Optimized ArchitectureApril 2019July 2022Allow3930YesNo
16343552Tire Having An Optimized ArchitectureApril 2019May 2023Abandon4940NoNo
16343603Tire Comprising Working Layers Having An Improved ArchitectureApril 2019March 2023Allow4730YesNo
16386501TIREApril 2019February 2022Allow3410YesNo
16384625TyreApril 2019August 2023Abandon5221YesNo
16381888TYREApril 2019September 2022Allow4120NoNo
16378671TYREApril 2019September 2022Allow4220YesNo
16374833TIREApril 2019April 2022Allow3610NoNo
16374455TIREApril 2019March 2022Allow3510YesNo
16374087PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2019April 2022Allow3620YesNo
16374057PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2019August 2022Abandon4120NoNo
16330953TIRE WITH ASYMMETRIC SCULPTURE ELEMENTS AND OFF-CENTER NOISE DAMPERSMarch 2019May 2022Abandon3820NoNo
16292637TYREMarch 2019December 2022Allow4530YesNo
16292628TYREMarch 2019June 2022Allow4020NoNo
16292686TYREMarch 2019October 2023Abandon5540YesNo
16185842PNEUMATIC TIRENovember 2018August 2022Abandon4540YesNo
16099079Pneumatic Tire, Having Working Layers Comprising Monofilaments And A Tire Tread With GroovesNovember 2018May 2022Abandon4230NoNo
16096451TIREOctober 2018April 2022Allow4231NoNo
16168313PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018August 2022Abandon4620NoNo
16167779PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018May 2022Abandon4320NoNo
16167843PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018June 2022Abandon4320NoNo
16167768PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018September 2021Allow3510NoNo
16168348PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018September 2022Abandon4720NoNo
16095558Tire Tread Comprising Cutouts Of Different DepthsOctober 2018July 2021Allow3310NoNo
16161334PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018July 2021Allow3320NoNo
16094197Pneumatic TireOctober 2018July 2021Allow3310NoNo
16089798Tire TreadSeptember 2018July 2021Allow3320YesNo
16087611PNEUMATIC TIRESeptember 2018September 2021Allow3621NoNo
16117764TIREAugust 2018September 2021Allow3720NoNo
16112355TIREAugust 2018February 2021Allow3010NoNo
16077724Pneumatic TireAugust 2018April 2022Allow4430NoNo
16004266Pneumatic Tire and Method of Manufacturing Pneumatic TireJune 2018June 2022Allow4840YesNo
15984839Method of Producing Limestone-Simulating ConcreteMay 2018February 2021Allow3310NoNo
15631507PNEUMATIC TYRE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFORJune 2017September 2020Allow3910NoNo
15496280PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2017August 2020Allow3910NoNo
15496132PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2017January 2021Allow4520NoNo
15494828PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2017February 2021Abandon4620NoNo
15489347PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2017May 2022Abandon6040YesNo
15485715PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2017June 2021Abandon5040YesNo
15518567REINFORCED PRODUCT COMPRISING A COMPOSITION WITH A LOW SULFUR CONTENT AND TIRE COMPRISING SAID REINFORCED PRODUCTApril 2017September 2022Abandon6040YesNo
15517939Pneumatic TireApril 2017July 2020Abandon3910NoNo
15515934SOUNDPROOF TYRE FOR VEHICLE WHEELSMarch 2017August 2020Abandon4120YesYes
15442248TIRE HAVING CHAFER STRUCTURE FOR ENHANCING BEAD ENDURANCEFebruary 2017June 2020Allow4030NoNo
15504773PNEUMATIC TIREFebruary 2017August 2020Abandon4230YesNo
15413512TREAD WEAR INDICATORJanuary 2017November 2020Abandon4540NoNo
15384686PNEUMATIC TIRE HAVING A SINGLE CARCASS PLY REINFORCED WITH STEEL CORDSDecember 2016January 2020Abandon3720NoYes
15315186AGRICULTURAL TIRENovember 2016September 2021Abandon5840YesNo
15304976TIRE FOR VEHICLE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANT TYPEOctober 2016January 2021Allow5140YesNo
15304933TIRE FOR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL VEHICLEOctober 2016January 2021Allow5140YesNo
15304622Crown Reinforcement For An Airplane TireOctober 2016February 2020Abandon4020NoNo
15304662Crown Reinforcement For An Airplane TireOctober 2016February 2020Abandon4020NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DYE, ROBERT C.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
7
Examiner Affirmed
6
(85.7%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(14.3%)
Reversal Percentile
25.7%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 14.3% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is below the USPTO average, indicating that appeals face more challenges here than typical.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
8
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(12.5%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
7
(87.5%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
15.2%
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, 12.5% 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 DYE, ROBERT C - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DYE, ROBERT C works in Art Unit 1749 and has examined 151 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 71.5%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 39 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DYE, ROBERT C's allowance rate of 71.5% places them in the 34% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by DYE, ROBERT C receive 2.31 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by DYE, ROBERT C is 39 months. This places the examiner in the 26% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +9.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DYE, ROBERT C. This interview benefit is in the 42% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 21.6% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 26% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 46.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 70% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 3% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 12.5% of appeals filed. This is in the 2% 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, 38.1% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 27% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.7% of allowed cases (in the 63% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments more often than average to place applications in condition for allowance (MPEP § 1302.04).

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 6% 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:

    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.