Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18719377 | Negative Electrode for Lithium Secondary Battery, and Magnetic Alignment Device for Negative Electrode for Same | June 2024 | March 2025 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17762127 | CARBON MATERIAL AND ELECTRODE MATERIAL FOR POWER STORAGE DEVICE | March 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17654091 | LITHIUM TITANATE SINTERED BODY PLATE | March 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17635927 | LITHIUM ION BATTERY MODULE AND BATTERY PACK | February 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17631601 | Non-Aqueous Electrolyte Solution for Lithium Secondary Battery and Lithium Secondary Battery Including the Same | January 2022 | December 2024 | Allow | 34 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17587680 | SECONDARY BATTERY | January 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17619942 | SWAPPABLE BATTERY PACK | December 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17543657 | PARTICLES IN ELECTROSPUN POLYMER FIBERS WITH THERMAL RESPONSE PROPERTIES | December 2021 | September 2024 | Abandon | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17615690 | Non-Aqueous Electrolyte Solution And Lithium Secondary Battery Including The Same | December 2021 | October 2024 | Allow | 35 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17526064 | Coated Beohmite Particles for Battery Separators | November 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17510028 | METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE FOR LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERY AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERY USING THE NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE | October 2021 | June 2025 | Allow | 43 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17504631 | ELECTRODE STRUCTURE AND SECONDARY BATTERY | October 2021 | August 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17602602 | LITHIUM METAL COMPOSITE OXIDE POWDER AND POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY | October 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17600589 | BATTERY CELL ASSEMBLY HAVING GAS EXHAUST AND HEAT EMISSION FUNCTION | September 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17599794 | HONEYCOMB-LIKE ENERGY STORAGE CELL RECEPTACLE, RECHARGEABLE BATTERY PACK, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A RECHARGEABLE BATTERY PACK | September 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17599956 | Battery Pack with a Pressure Management System including a Compensating Device | September 2021 | July 2024 | Allow | 34 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17477313 | TRANSLUCENT AND TRANSPARENT SEPARATORS | September 2021 | September 2024 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17387737 | Solid State Catholyte or Electrolyte for Energy Storage Devices | July 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner SON, TAEYOUNG works in Art Unit 1751 and has examined 17 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 35.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.
Examiner SON, TAEYOUNG's allowance rate of 35.3% 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 SON, TAEYOUNG receive 1.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 12% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by SON, TAEYOUNG is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 14% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +78.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SON, TAEYOUNG. This interview benefit is in the 100% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 69% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 99% 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'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.
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.