USPTO Examiner DIETERLE JENNIFER M - Art Unit 1776

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18904871PHOTOCATALYTIC DEGRADATION AND REMOVAL OF IMIDACLOPRID INSECTICIDE USING HYDROPHILIC MAGNETIC COVALENT ORGANIC FRAMEWORKS (COFs)October 2024June 2025Allow920YesNo
18203892PRODUCT FOR PFAS ADSORPTIONMay 2023September 2025Allow2710NoNo
18131506ELECTROLYTE AND LITHIUM ION BATTERYApril 2023March 2026Allow3510NoNo
18171757WATER PRODUCTION FACILITY AND METHOD OF REPLACING ION EXCHANGE RESINFebruary 2023September 2025Allow3110YesNo
18007346LITHIUM-ION BATTERY POSITIVE ELECTRODE LITHIUM SUPPLEMENT ADDITIVE, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR, AND LITHIUM-ION BATTERYJanuary 2023December 2025Allow3510NoNo
18013690BATTERY AND BATTERY HOLDER ARRANGEMENT FOR A LIGHT ELECTRIC VEHICLEDecember 2022February 2026Abandon3710NoNo
17927079HOME TOILET WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM COMPRISING BIO-TREATMENT DEVICE AND COMBUSTION DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR TREATING TOILET WASTE BY USING SAMENovember 2022December 2025Allow3710YesNo
17927091WATER PURIFIER FILTER AND WATER PURIFIER COMPRISING SAMENovember 2022December 2025Allow3720NoNo
17985306METHOD FOR REMOVING ORGANIC POLLUTANTS FROM WATER BODIES BY ACTIVATING PERSULFATE WITH NUTRIENT-ENHANCED SOYBEAN SPROUT-BASED BIOCHARNovember 2022September 2025Allow3410NoNo
17922811BATTERY MODULE, AND BATTERY PACK AND VEHICLE COMPRISING SAMENovember 2022January 2026Allow3820YesNo
17887593FILTER DEVICE AND FILTER ELEMENTAugust 2022November 2025Allow3910NoNo
17883185FILTER ELEMENT FOR AN AIR FILTER HAVING A PRIMARY AIR OUTLET AND A SECONDARY AIR OUTLET, AND AN AIR FILTER AND INSTALLATION METHODAugust 2022October 2025Allow3820NoNo
17794319TWO-PIECE OIL FILTER ASSEMBLY FOR PUMPSJuly 2022February 2026Abandon4320NoNo
17721256WATER PURIFIER AND SUPPLY IN A VEHICLEApril 2022March 2025Allow3520NoNo
17679607METHOD OF PRODUCING NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY, AND NEGATIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIALFebruary 2022July 2025Allow4011NoNo
17669070ELECTRIFIED VEHICLE BATTERY PRESSURE RELIEF STRUCTUREFebruary 2022September 2025Allow4310YesNo
17431124ELECTROLYSIS CELL FOR AN ELECTROLYTIC TREATMENT OF A LIQUIDAugust 2021February 2025Allow4211NoNo
11877454NITRIC OXIDE SENSOROctober 2007November 2010Allow3711NoNo
11576211DEVICE FOR DIELECTROPHORETIC SEPARATION OF PARTICLES CONTAINED IN A FLUIDJuly 2007July 2011Allow5240YesNo
11684819PARALLEL PLATE ELECTRODES FOR PARTICLE CONCENTRATION OR REMOVALMarch 2007June 2011Allow5130YesNo

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 DIETERLE, JENNIFER M - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DIETERLE, JENNIFER M works in Art Unit 1776 and has examined 4 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 51 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DIETERLE, JENNIFER M's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 94% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by DIETERLE, JENNIFER M receive 2.25 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 63% 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 DIETERLE, JENNIFER M is 51 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.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DIETERLE, JENNIFER M. This interview benefit is in the 13% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 25.0% of allowed cases (in the 99% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.

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:

  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.