Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19365820 | METHOD FOR MAKING PEROVSKITE ELECTRODES | October 2025 | March 2026 | Allow | 4 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 19247722 | 3D-TRIPTYCENE BASED MICROPOROUS POLYMER AS ELECTROCATALYST FOR HYDROGEN EVOLUTION REACTION | June 2025 | September 2025 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18134325 | ELECTRODE HAVING SINTERED GOLD NANOSTRUCTURE | April 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17983418 | GOLD-COPPER ALLOY NANOSTRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR SYNTHESIZING THE SAME | November 2022 | September 2025 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17950321 | ELECTROCHEMICAL SYNTHESIS METHOD FOR LITHIUM SUPEROXIDE | September 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17911044 | PLATING APPARATUS | September 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17799828 | ELECTROLYSIS VESSEL | August 2022 | August 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17844439 | AEROSOL-ASSISTED CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION OF NICKEL SULFIDE NANOWIRES FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL WATER OXIDATION | June 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17662676 | ANION EXCHANGE POLYMERS AND MEMBRANES FOR ELECTROLYSIS | May 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17734204 | Equipment for Continuously Processing Electrochemical Device or Component for Increasing Capacity | May 2022 | March 2026 | Allow | 46 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17770817 | PROCESSES FOR THE ALKALIATION OR RE-ALKALIATION OF AN ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL | April 2022 | March 2026 | Allow | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17723273 | FINISHING SYSTEM | April 2022 | February 2025 | Allow | 34 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17716524 | Electrochemical Oxidation of Amine Complexants in Waste Streams from Electroplating Processes | April 2022 | October 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17709000 | LOW-PRESSURE COATING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COATING SEPARATED POWDERS OR FIBRES BY MEANS OF PHYSICAL OR CHEMICAL VAPOUR PHASE DEPOSITION | March 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17641767 | SUBSTRATE HOLDER, SUBSTRATE PLATING DEVICE EQUIPPED THEREWITH, AND ELECTRICAL CONTACT | March 2022 | December 2025 | Allow | 45 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17680176 | ELECTROPLATING SYSTEM INCLUDING AN IMPROVED BASE STRUCTURE | February 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 45 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17678751 | ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE | February 2022 | February 2025 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17651966 | CARBON DIOXIDE ADSORPTION-DESORPTION DEVICE | February 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17753136 | ELECTRODE FOR HIGH-PERFORMANCE ALKALINE WATER ELECTROLYSIS, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR | February 2022 | August 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17621532 | Electrode for Electrolysis | December 2021 | November 2025 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17616410 | ELECTRODE COATING | December 2021 | September 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17614435 | METHOD FOR PREPARING CATIONIC ELECTRODEPOSITION COATING COMPOSITION | November 2021 | July 2025 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17604351 | CATIONIC ELECTRODEPOSITION COATING COMPOSITION | October 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17498314 | ELECTROCHEMICAL HYDROGEN PUMP AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME | October 2021 | December 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17601003 | ANODIZED COATING FOR MAGNESIUM | October 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17599141 | CATIONIC ELECTRODEPOSITION COATING MATERIAL COMPOSITION | September 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17440306 | FUNCTIONAL MATERIAL AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME | September 2021 | February 2026 | Allow | 53 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17425203 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PRE-LITHIATION OF ELECTRODE | July 2021 | December 2024 | Allow | 41 | 0 | 0 | No | 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 SYLVESTER, KEVIN works in Art Unit 1794 and has examined 9 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 55.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 44 months.
Examiner SYLVESTER, KEVIN's allowance rate of 55.6% places them in the 16% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by SYLVESTER, KEVIN receive 1.44 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 24% 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 SYLVESTER, KEVIN is 44 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 +66.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SYLVESTER, KEVIN. This interview benefit is in the 98% 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 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.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 8% 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 40.0% of allowed cases (in the 96% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.
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.