USPTO Examiner SZUMIGALSKI NICOLE ASHLEY - Art Unit 1755

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19000293ALL GLASS BUCKET VAPORIZERDecember 2024April 2025Allow410YesNo
17767239AEROSOL-GENERATING ARTICLEMay 2022April 2025Allow3620YesNo
17766605Filter for Cigarettes Made with Biological MaterialApril 2022October 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17654180PATCH FOR SMOKING VESSELSMarch 2022August 2024Abandon2911NoNo
17686496AEROSOL GENERATING DEVICEMarch 2022June 2025Allow4020NoNo
17636318FLARED SUSCEPTOR HEATING ARRANGEMENT FOR AEROSOL-GENERATING DEVICEFebruary 2022June 2025Abandon4020NoNo
17634773A Cartridge for an Electronic Cigarette, An Electronic Cigarette, and an Assembly Method for an Electronic CigaretteFebruary 2022January 2025Abandon3501NoNo
17631231Tipping Wrapper for aerosol Generating ArticleJanuary 2022December 2024Abandon3501NoNo
17581863ELECTRICAL HEATING HOOKAHJanuary 2022July 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17626220METHOD AND APPARATUS TO CAST A SHEET OF MATERIAL CONTAINING ALKALOIDSJanuary 2022February 2025Allow3721NoNo
17564763RETROFITTING BONG SMOKING ADAPTERDecember 2021June 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17562450ATOMIZER AND ELECTRONIC ATOMIZING DEVICE HAVING THE SAMEDecember 2021February 2025Allow3740NoNo
17542493AEROSOL GENERATION DEVICE AND HEATING ASSEMBLY THEREOFDecember 2021December 2024Allow3640YesNo
17615321MACHINE AND METHOD FOR MAKING A SUB-UNIT OF A SMOKING ARTICLENovember 2021October 2024Abandon3410YesNo
17614332CHARCOAL HEADPIECE FOR A WATER PIPENovember 2021November 2024Abandon3510NoNo
17530697Diffusion BarrierNovember 2021May 2024Abandon3001NoNo
17600694AEROSOL-GENERATING ARTICLE HAVING A TUBULAR SUPPORT ELEMENTOctober 2021April 2025Allow4330NoNo
17478853ATOMIZING ASSEMBLY AND ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE COMPRISING THE SAMESeptember 2021January 2025Abandon4030NoNo
17436605VAPING COMPOSITIONSSeptember 2021October 2024Abandon3710NoNo
17278717AEROSOL GENERATING DEVICE INCLUDING EJECTORMarch 2021June 2025Abandon5140YesNo

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 SZUMIGALSKI, NICOLE ASHLEY - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner SZUMIGALSKI, NICOLE ASHLEY works in Art Unit 1755 and has examined 19 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 31.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 36 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner SZUMIGALSKI, NICOLE ASHLEY's allowance rate of 31.6% places them in the 2% 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 SZUMIGALSKI, NICOLE ASHLEY receive 1.74 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% 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 SZUMIGALSKI, NICOLE ASHLEY is 36 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 +23.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SZUMIGALSKI, NICOLE ASHLEY. This interview benefit is in the 73% 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, 21.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 17% 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 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 41% 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, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.

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 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:

  • 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 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.