Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18944099 | CRACK-RESISTANT ULTRA-HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE FOR UNDERGROUND ENGINEERING IN WATER-RICH STRATA, PREPARATION METHOD, AND APPLICATION THEREOF | November 2024 | February 2025 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18047528 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING | October 2022 | January 2025 | Abandon | 27 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17959473 | Microfluidic Sensing Devices | October 2022 | December 2024 | Allow | 27 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17882761 | SUPRAMOLECULAR ADDITIVES FOR SEMICRYSTALLINE PLASTICS | August 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 32 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 17835780 | BLENDS OF VIRGIN HDPE AND POST CONSUMER RECYCLATE HDPE AND METHODS THEREOF | June 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 34 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17477136 | POLYMER, SEPARATING AGENT, PRODUCTION METHOD OF POLYMER, SEPARATION METHOD OF COMPOUND, AND PRODUCTION METHOD OF COMPOUND | September 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17398331 | CURABLE COMPOSITION | August 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17380091 | AMINE-APPENDED CHEMICAL SORBENT | July 2021 | November 2024 | Abandon | 40 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17291225 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING AROMATIC POLYSULFONE | May 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17290596 | AROMATIC POLYESTER, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR, AND COMPOSITION | April 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17287579 | POLYETHYLENE COMPOSITION FOR HIGH PRESSURE RESISTANT PIPES WITH IMPROVED HOMOGENEITY | April 2021 | November 2024 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17284595 | SILICONE MODIFICATION BY SURFACE HYDROSILYLATION | April 2021 | May 2024 | Abandon | 37 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17283324 | POLYACRYLIC PFPE DERIVATIVES | April 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 17282462 | POLYESTER COPOLYMER HAVING EXCELLENT PROCESSABILITY, AND PRODUCT INCLUDING THE SAME | April 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17281664 | METHOD FOR PREPARING A POLYESTER OF THE POLY(1,4:3,6-DIANHYDROHEXITOL-COCYCLOHEXYLENE TEREPHTHALATE) TYPE | March 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17198573 | NEW DIALKYL TIN OXIDE COMPOSITION AND PROCESS FOR PRODUCING 2-DIMETHYLAMINOETHYL (METH)ACRYLATE | March 2021 | April 2024 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17124516 | RADIO FREQUENCY MODULE AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE | December 2020 | November 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17047898 | THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITION, METHOD FOR THE MANUFACTURE THEREOF, AND ARTICLES PREPARED THEREFROM | October 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17046869 | Polycarbonate Resin Composition and Molded Article Formed Therefrom | October 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 48 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17063871 | END-MODIFIED DIENE POLYMER, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE POLYMER | October 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17029135 | SELF-DISINFECTING GLOVE COMPOSITION AND METHOD OF PRODUCTION THEREOF | September 2020 | March 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17012707 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING AT LEAST ONE PATTERNED DESIGN COMPRISING A PLURALITY OF PATTERN ELEMENTS BY MEANS OF A LASER | September 2020 | March 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16623869 | CARBON BLACK-CONTAINING BIMODAL POLYETHYLENE COMPOSITION | December 2019 | July 2024 | Abandon | 55 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BENITEZ, PATRICK LOEN.
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, 0.0% 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.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner BENITEZ, PATRICK LOEN works in Art Unit 1764 and has examined 22 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 18.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 43 months.
Examiner BENITEZ, PATRICK LOEN's allowance rate of 18.2% places them in the 1% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by BENITEZ, PATRICK LOEN receive 2.00 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BENITEZ, PATRICK LOEN is 43 months. This places the examiner in the 4% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +36.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BENITEZ, PATRICK LOEN. This interview benefit is in the 87% 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, 18.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 11% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.
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.
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 6% 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.