USPTO Examiner DEL SOLE JOSEPH STEVEN - Art Unit 1763

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18770966NON-ORTHOGONAL ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING AND THE TREATMENT OF PARTS MANUFACTURED THEREOFJuly 2024October 2025Allow1621NoNo
18674983Blow- Molded Panel and Manufacturing Method for Blow-Molded PanelMay 2024September 2025Abandon1510NoNo
18428346Pure Layered Stretch Film Produced Using Single Pass Extrusion ResinsJanuary 2024January 2026Abandon2420NoNo
18457912METHODS OF PRODUCING CARBON/CARBON COMPOSITE PREFORMS AND CARBON/CARBON COMPOSITES FORMED THEREFROMAugust 2023November 2025Allow2720NoNo
18209054Processes For Polymerizing Alpha-Olefins, Internal Olefins And Compositions ThereofJune 2023August 2025Abandon2631NoNo
18329714IMPRINT APPARATUS, IMPRINT METHOD, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING ARTICLEJune 2023March 2026Allow3321NoNo
18039916MOLDED ARTICLE MANUFACTURING METHOD, RESIN IMPREGNATING APPARATUS, AND 3D PRINTERJune 2023November 2025Allow3020YesNo
18029084THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING OF METAL OBJECTS USING BINDING AGENT WITH COPPER NITRATEMarch 2023March 2026Allow3611NoNo
18080770AGENT CONTAINING EMULSIFIER AND MICROCAPSULESDecember 2022November 2025Allow3510NoNo
18001769METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A COMPOSITE PART FOR A TURBOMACHINEDecember 2022August 2025Allow3220NoNo
18072281GYRO DROP APPARATUS AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAMENovember 2022February 2026Allow3810NoNo
17999453HEATING OVEN AND METHOD OF USENovember 2022November 2025Allow3521NoNo
17903689IMAGE PRESENTATION SYSTEM FOR AMUSEMENT PARK ATTRACTION SYSTEMSeptember 2022February 2026Allow4110YesNo
17898790STARTING BLOCK OR BASE PLATE WITH A SUPPORTING LEDGE DEVICE FOR A START OF A BACKSTROKE RACEAugust 2022August 2025Allow3510NoNo
17801699TURF SYSTEM FOR SPORTS OR DECORATIVE USE AND METHOD FOR POSITIONING SUCH SYSTEMAugust 2022January 2026Abandon4110NoNo
17760477A PROCESS FOR SYNTHESIS OF CARBON BEADSAugust 2022February 2026Allow4211NoNo
17880174ROBOTIC ARM INTEGRATED IMMERSIVE REALITYAugust 2022March 2026Allow4320YesNo
17797167APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MAKING OBJECTS FROM RECYCLED POLYMERIC MATERIALAugust 2022June 2025Allow3411NoNo
17849535LOOSE TUBE-TYPE OPTICAL CABLE PRODUCTION DEVICE AND PRODUCTION METHODJune 2022October 2025Allow4030NoNo
17808530FERRIS WHEEL INSTALLATION COMPRISING A GUIDE STRUCTURE FOR GONDOLAS HAVING SLIDING BALL JOINTSJune 2022December 2025Allow4110NoNo
17826089MOLDING APPARATUS, MOLDING METHOD, AND ARTICLE MANUFACTURING METHODMay 2022December 2025Allow4351YesNo
17762468Thermoplastic Resin CompositionMarch 2022February 2026Allow4720NoNo
17683733Cake Decorating ToolMarch 2022November 2025Allow4540YesNo
17626020ACRYLIC RUBBER EXCELLENT IN STORAGE STABILITYJanuary 2022September 2025Abandon4410NoNo
17616042NON-DEGRADING SWELLABLE POLYMERS AS MATERIALS FOR BIOMEDICAL DEVICESDecember 2021October 2025Abandon4620NoNo
17437245CLEANING OF FOOD PRODUCT MOULDING INSERTSSeptember 2021October 2025Allow5021YesNo
17263838AMORPHOUS COPOLYMERIZED POLYESTER RAW MATERIAL FOR A FILM, HEAT-SHRINKABLE POLYESTER-BASED FILM, HEAT-SHRINKABLE LABEL, AND PACKAGING BAGJanuary 2021May 2025Allow5141YesNo

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 DEL SOLE, JOSEPH STEVEN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DEL SOLE, JOSEPH STEVEN works in Art Unit 1763 and has examined 3 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 50 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DEL SOLE, JOSEPH STEVEN'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 DEL SOLE, JOSEPH STEVEN receive 2.67 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 78% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by DEL SOLE, JOSEPH STEVEN is 50 months. This places the examiner in the 5% 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 +100.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DEL SOLE, JOSEPH STEVEN. 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 38% 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 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 6% 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 7% 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:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • 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.
  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.
  • 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.